Decline and Fall

Contents
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................. 3
SECTION-I........................................................................................ 12
THE KALABHRAS IN PANDINAD.....................................................12
THE PANDIYAS OF THE SANGHAM AGE......................................12
THE VELVIKKUDI GRANT............................................................16
EXPLANATION OF SOME TERMS................................................18
WHO WERE THE KALABHRAS?..................................................26
THE SATAVAHANAS....................................................................28
THE KALABHRAS AND THE GANGAS..........................................28
KALIDEVA AND KALI KULA.........................................................32
THE KALVAR CLAN.....................................................................33
PULLI OF VANKATAM..................................................................35
VADUHAR AND THE KALABHRAS...............................................38
WERE THEY TAMILS?.................................................................43
CONCLUSION............................................................................. 46
THE MUTTARAITAR....................................................................47
THE LANGUAGE AND RELIGION OF THE KALABHRAS...................55
THE LANGUAGE OF THE KALABHRAS........................................55
THE SHADOW OF THE KALABHRA RULE....................................57
THE RELIGION OF THE KALABHRAS...........................................58
1

THE KALABHRA JAINS OF THE PERIOD.......................................61

KALABHRAS IN CHOLANAD AND TONDAINAD...........................65
KALABHRAS IN CHOLANAD.......................................................65
ACCUTA VIKKANTA....................................................................66
Buddhism.................................................................................. 70
KALABHRA AND KALAPPALA......................................................71
KALAPPALAR AND KALAPPALA-RATAR........................................74
KUTRUVA NATANAR...................................................................76
A LATER ACCUTA KALAPPALA....................................................79
KALABHRAS IN TONDAINAD......................................................80

SECTION-I -- THE KALABHRAS IN PANDINAD

THE PANDIYAS OF THE SANGHAM AGE
We are able to piece together only the history of the Pandiyas
beginning from Kadumkon, through the elaborate references in
the Velvikkudi grant and the later epigraphical records. But we
have no manner of knowing the genealogy of the Pandiyas of the
Sangham age and earlier. Had such a genealogy been available,
it would have helped us to understand the political state of the
Pandinad at the commencement of the Kalabhra invasion. As this
is not available, we can only piece together the literary
references in the poems of the Sangham age. These are naturally
scrappy and disconnected. But yet, they are useful in one way,
that is, in ascertaining the religious leanings of the Pandiya rulers
of the period earlier than the advent of the Kalabhras in the
history of Madurai.
We shall now glance through the list of the Pandiyas of the
Sangham period. We have a mention of the Pandiyas who had
established the first two Sanghams at the Southern Madurai and
at Kapatapuram, both now submerged under the sea. Some
would say that the existence of the two Sanghams might not
have been a historical fact. That is not material to us for the
consideration of the Pandiyas of the Sangham period. 89
Pandiyas from Kaysinavaludi to Kadumkon are said to have
patronized the First Sangham, and 59 Pandiyas from Venter3

Cheliyan to Mudat-Tirumaran had patronised the Second

Sangham at Kapatapuram. We do not know the names or other
history of any of these Pandiyas except two. One is Vadimbalamba-ninra-Pandiyan and the other is Palyagasalai mudukudumip- Peruvaludi.
Vadimbalamba ninra Pandiyan was also known as Nilamtaru
Tiruvirp-Pandiyan and Pandiyan Makirtti. He had a very long rule.
Tolkappiyam was published in his court. He is the same as the
Pandiya of the puranic legends who threw a spear at the onrushing tidal sea and made it dry up, the Lord of the Sea bowing
at his feet. In a famous Purananuru verse, poet Nettimaiyar refers
to the act of his drawing the course of a new river Pahruli in the
Kumarinadu before its deluge by the sea and his celebration of a
festival to the Sea god.
[Vide Purananaru verse 9 lines 8-12]
The other Pandiya ruler Palyagasalai Mudukudumi is dealt with
fully in Note A at the end.
We shall now mention a few words about the Pandiyas who are
mentioned in the Sangham poetry as having ruled at the present
city of Madurai. Their chronological sequence is not
ascertainable.
Mudat-Tirumaran was the last of the Pandiyas of the Kapatapuram line. When the Kumari nadu was submerged, he went
north to the modern city of Madurai; at first Manalur was his
4

capital and then this Madurai. He was also a poet and we have
two of his songs in Narrinai. [Verses 105 and 228].
The Dalavaypuram plates' mention of the Pandiya who "made
the city of Madurapuram and who established the Sangham there
and patronized Tamil" is taken to refer to this Pandiya, in
conformity with the legend.
Porkaip-pandiyan is just a legendary figure who cut off his arm
and replaced it with a golden arm. He probably belongs to an
earlier period and nothing more is known about him. Mativanan
was a Pandiya who wrote a dramatic treatise in his name called
Mativananar Natakat-Tamilnul, according to Adiyarkkunallar, who
gives some citations from the text.
[Vide page 191, Silappadhikaram, Dr. Swaminatha Aiyar's
edition 1927]
Kadalul-maynda Ilamperuvaludi was also a Pandiya ruler and
poet who has contributed a verse each to Purananuru and
Paripadal. He has praised Vishnu. Pandiyan Arivudai Nambi has
sung four verses of which the one on children as the real wealth
of man (Puram 188) is famous. Bhuta-pandiyan's queen has been
a reputed poet.
Nedumcheliyan the victor over the Aryan forces is said to be
the Pandiya ruler whose death was caused by Kannaki. Then
Nanmaran, who died in the art gallery. Neduncheliyan, who was
the victor at Talaiyalamkanam, has sung a verse in Purananuru
5

but is celerated in many verses and in two copper plates. UgrapPeruvaludi, the victor at Kanapper was probably his son. He has
sung some verses and is said to have been responsible for the
compilation of Ahananuru. Besides these, there have been eight
other Pandiyas, all poets, celebrated in poetry, including Maran
Valudi who is said to have organised the compilation of Narrinai.
These names of the Pandiya rulers are given here to indicate
that the Pandiya dynasty of the period was a valiant one, always
victorious in battle, and that most of the rulers were eminent
poets.
At this stage we have to take note of two factors. One is that
not one of these Pandiyas was considered to be of the Jain faith
or the Buddhist faith or to have given support to any non-vaidika
path. In the line of Palyagasalai who performed vedic sacrifices
and of Ilamperuvaludi who has sung on Vishnu, we are to
conclude that all these were following the Vedic religions.
The second fact is that no where do we have any mention of
Jainism or Buddhism in all the 2381 verses of the Sangham
poetry. We have all other deities glorified - Siva, Muruha, Vishnu,
Korravai etc. but no Jain or Buddha. This indicates in
unmistakable terms that both the two cults Jainism and
Buddhism were unknown in Madurai (Pandinad) in the Sangham
period. Some critics would seek to call the poets, Nikanta and
Ulochanar as jains and Ilambodhi as a Buddhist. This requires re-

examination in the absence of any reference to these cults in the

Sangham period.
Some rockbed inscriptions near Madurai had been considered
by epigraphists to refer to Jain monks, on the resemblance of the
script to the Asokan Scripts. This also seems to require a reexamination, as we have absolutely no reference to these cults in
the literary history of the period.
This survey of earlier Pandiyan history has become necessary
in order to understand fully the nature of the impact of the
Kalabhras in Pandinad which is the subject of our investigation
here. Having in mind the absence of any direct reference to Arha
or to Jainism in any form in the Sangham literature and also the
fact that the rock beds for Jain monks around Madurai are still an
open question which may point to a later date, we may venture
an opinion that Jainism was introduced into the Pandinad by the
Kalabhras, as we shall see hereafter. Probably, we are not sure,
there were Jain monks touring the Tamilnad for places of
seclusion where they might perform sallekhana as was said to be
done in the early periods by Bhadrabahu and Chandra Gupta at
Sravana Belgola. But Jainism as a cult had not penetrated into
the Pandinad until the raid of the Kalabhras.

THE VELVIKKUDI GRANT

The Velvikkudi grant is the first historical document to
introduce the Kalabhras to the world of historians and Tamil
scholars. This is in ten copper plates and preserved in the British
7

museum, London. Copies of the plates were sent by Dr. Fleet to

the Archaeological Department of the Government of India in
1893 but they were not studied for a long time. The grant was
first commented upon by Krishna Sastri in 1923. Ten copper plate
grants of the Pandiyas have been published so far [Ten Pandiya
copper plates: The Tamil Varlatru Kazhagam, Madras 1967] and
of the ten, this happens to be the earliest ; it is also the earliest
among all the available grants of the Pandiyas, both on stone and
on copper. It is valuable for the reconstruction of early Pandiya
history. The grant is both in Sanskrit and in Tamil. Sanskrit words
are written in the Sanskrit language. Sanskrit is in the grantha
script while Tamil is in the vatteluttu.
The grant runs to 155 lines. The first 30 lines, lines 99 to 101
and 142 to 150 are in Sanskrit. The Sanskrit portion of the grant
begins with an invocation to Siva and goes on to enunciate the
greatness of the Pandiya dynasty which was crowned by sage
Agastya. It ends with the statement that the donor of the grant
was Jatilavarman son of Maravarman, also called Ranadhiran and
Rajasimhan, through the daughter of a Malaya Chief.
The Tamil portion is fully in verse [Although all transcripts of
the grant have printed in prose the end portion relating to the
boundaries of land gifted, it appears to have been composed in
some poetic metre and can be printed in a verse form] and
begins directly with the subject, without any preamble. We shall
give below in translation the portions relevant to an
8

understanding of the advent of the Kalabhras and of the Pandiya

history.
"The great Pandiya King, Palyaga Mudukudumip-Peruvaludi
caused a yajna to be performed in the Pahanurk-kutram by Korkai
Kilan Narkotran who never left the path of the Vedas. The place
of the yajna was then named as Velvikkudi (aelvi-yajna, kudisuffix denoting a village). The king then and there gave it with
libation of water to Narkotran. He and his descendants possessed
and enjoyed the land for a long time. Then a conceited (cruel)
ruler named Kalabhra seized [The grant says definitely that the
land was seized (kaikkondatanai) and not that it was resumed, as
one writter has said] the land driving away numberless princes
and resumed also the village gifted above.
"Now appeared the Pandiyadhiraja named Kadumkon [This
Kadumkon is a historical figure. He should not be confused with
the Kadumkon with whom the First Tamil Sangham at the
Southern Madurai (submerged by the sea) abruptly terminated]
like the sun rising from the vast sea; he was the Tennavan with
the brilliant spear, whose army removed by its might the hold of
others over the lustrous Earth and brought her under the shade
of his own protecting umbrella, after destroying the might of the
enemies. Then came his son, Avani Chudamani Maravarman,
then Seliyan Vanavan Sendan; his son was Arikesari
Asamasaman Sri Maravarman; then came Ko-Chadaiyan; his son

was Manavenkudai manter - Maran; and lastly his son

Nedunjadaiyan.
"In the third year of Nedunjadaiyan's reign, one person came
to the city of Madurai and cried 'O King'. The King
(Nedunjadaiyan) immediately called him and asked him, 'What is
your complaint?' He came and stood before the king and thus
submitted his petition. "Oh mighty king of a great army ! The
place called Velvikkudi in Pahanurk-kutram was granted for vedic
studies by your ancestor Palyaga Mudu Kudumip - Peruvaludi, the
supreme Lord, who never swerved from the path of justice. But it
was resumed by the Kalabhras with the unflinching vast army".
"Well, well" said the King smiling, "Prove your right to it by a
documentary evidence and have it". Thereupon he produced the
documentary evidence. Then the king, greatly pleased, said,
"What was justly gifted by our ancestors is hereby gifted again by
us also". So saying the king with a large army of chariots gave
the place to Kamakkani Narchingan of Korkai".
Then follows a long description of the boundaries of the place
Finally the grant goes on to state that Kamakkani Suvaran Singan
of Korkai who obtained this grant kept a third of the property to
himself and in turn gifted away the remaining two-thirds to fifty
brahmins of the place with libations of water.

EXPLANATION OF SOME TERMS

Many eminent scholars have ably interpreted this grant and
its terminology. But yet we find there are some incorrect
10

explanations and distortions out of context, and contrary to

language traditions. Hence some comments on a few important
and salient points, though they may be unimportant in
themselves, may yet be necessary. The whole narration here is
given a dramatic touch: it is not merely a prosaic statement but,
very unusual in epigraphic records, we are placed here in the role
of spectators in a drama being enacted before our eyes.
1. Line 2. Palyaga Mudukudumip-peruvaludi was a Pandiya
ruler in the period of the Sangham poetry; he might have ruled
some time during the period 300 B.C. to 100 A.D. [see app 1].
Purananuru has five beautifiul verses composed in his honour by
the poets Karikilar, Nettimaiyar and Nedumpalliyattanar. One of
the verses celebrates the yajna conducted by him. The Sangham
poetry had all been produced within a period of a few centuries
round the beginning of the Christian era, i.e., between about 300
B.C. to 200 A.D. It is too late in the day for any one to attempt to
deny the fact that there was a period called the Sangham age
when a considerable volume of crisp and terse at the same time
elegant Tamil poetry, both romantic and heroic, was produced. By
no stretch of imagination can this King Palyagasalai
Mudukudumip-peruvaludi be brought to any period after the 2nd
century A.D., much less to the period, 7th century, as proposed
by one writer.
Line 5. Ter Maran: Professor Nilakanta Sastri has cautioned
scholars against construing the phrase Ter-Maran as the name of
11

a king, a mistake made by Mr. Krishna Sastri. The lines occurring

in the grant are to be translated as 'his son Maran of the horse
chariot, King of kings, a member of the Pandiya family, the proud
possessor of the white parasol etc. The professor's caution is
against separating the words in the phrase man-ter-maran as
man and termaran The king's name is only Maran; man-ter is a
compound adjective, where man (horse) qualifies ter (chariot)
and the nominal phrase man-ter qualifies Maran, the Pandiya
with the horse chariot. [In spite of his caution, a writer says in
1976 that the name of the King can be only Ter-Maran and it is
not right to take the name merely as Maran. This can only betray
ignorance of Tamil literary traditions or a wilful distortion of the
language].
Line 6. Korkai kilan Narkotran means only Narkotran, headman
of Korkai; it does not mean Lord of Korkai. This Narkotran again
was a brahmin, and brahmins have never been lords anywhere in
the past (during the period under consideration).
Line 7. Kelvi antanalar means brahmins well versed in the
Vedas. Kelvi is sruti, the Veda.
Line 10. Nidu-bhukti-tuyttapin : The right understanding of the
phrase is important for the proper evaluation of the incidents
narrated in the grant. Bhukti here is not a Tamil word nor a common word ; it is a technical word, a legal term in the Sanskrit
smritis.

12

We find here that the Velvikkudi grant is drawn up fully in

terms of the Dharma sastras like Yagnavalkya, Manu etc. The
Sastras insist upon three pramanas or evidences to prove one's
right in respect of immovable property and they are bhukti,
lekhya pramana and sakshi, namely possession and enjoyment,
written documents, and witnesses. These have been, we know,
fully utilised later by Sekkilar in the hearing of the plaint of the
old brahmin in the Tiru Navalur Sabha to prove that Sundara was
his slave. Sekkilar defines the three pramanas or evidences as
atchi usage or enjoyment, avanam or written document, and
ayalar tangal katchi or neighbours as witnesses. [Vide
Periyapuranam, Taduttatkonda puranam, verse 56]. It is
remarkable that the rules of the dharma sastra are scrupulously
mentioned by him effectively and in full. In the Velvikkudi grant
also, which was about five hundred years earlier than Sekkilar,
the pramanas are specifically mentioned.
The Velvikkudi grant mentions bhukti - possession and
enjoyment first; bhukti, and it is nidu bhukti ; enjoyment is here
for a long period, not a few generations : the smritis say that the
term bhukti goes to a period lasting beyond the memory of man
or three generations, which period was equivalent in time to a
period beyond the memory of man - father, grandfather and his
father at the least ; so the term nidu bhukti tuyttapin occurring in
the grant means that the land was in the possession and
enjoyment of the party for quite a long period, to warrant the
evidence to be admitted by the king immediately. So nidu bhukti
13

here is not a mere matter of a few years ; it is indeed quite a long

period.
Line 11. Alavariya Aadhirajarai may simply mean that the
kings were of limitless repute or might; aadhirajar - the kings who
had been ruling the land. (Aadhirajarai is here in Sanskrit ; the
first vowel is aa, long.)
Line 12. Kalabhran: This is the most important point of dispute
and conjecture in the whole series of sources for the history of
this period. Here Kalabhran is used in the singular; when the
same Kalabhra is referred to again in line 120 of the copper plate,
it is Kalabhrar in the plural. Later on the Dalavaypuram plates of
a later day (908 A.D.) also refer to the Kalabhrar (Kalappalar) in
the plural twice. Therefore we may take the major number of
occurrence as the plural, and say this refers not to a single ruler
but to a tribe or predatory clan which marched on Madurai,
captured it and ruled it for over 300 years, till it was driven out
by Kadumkon. The singular may also be indicative of the
contempt of the present donor of the grant, to the Kalabhras.
8. Line 12. Kaliyarasan: The word kali during the period of the
grant could have meant only conceit; it can not give the sense of
brave etc. directly. This also seems to be in agreement with the
term used by Sekkilar in relation to the Karunada invader.
`Valindu nilam kolvanay', seizing the land by force [Vide
Periyapuranam, Mutti Nayanar puranam, verses 11-14].
Aggression and conceit seem to be more appropriate than
14

bravery. There are any number of later references in the Jain epic
works referring to the word kali as a tyrannical rule. Jivaka
Cintamani and Culamani use it a number of times to signify
tyrannical rule. So here the term can be interpreted only as
Kalabhra the tyrant, the cruel ruler. It is not wicked as some have
said. The donor of the re-issued grant would certainly not have
referred to the aggressor in glowing terms as a brave king, but
would only have mentioned him as a tyrant, a cruel person.
Line 21. Manam portta-tanai vendan. The text has been
printed as manam pertta. It should be `manam portta' in
accordance with Tamil idiom. This means that manam (valour
with honour) enveloped the king's army. This sense is more
idiomatic than saying in this context that the army destroyed the
honour of the enemy (by causing his defeat). Pertta for portta
may be a scribal error.
Line 103. Manupaman: This is given as one of the titles of the
Pandiya, in Sanskrit in line 99. It means that this Parantaka
Nedunjadaiyan is comparable to Manu. Earlier we referred to the
Dharma Sastras. The comparison to Manu in this line would concede that the reference was quite relevant, as Manu Smriti is one
of the Dharma sastras. We may also recall here that line 136 of
the Dalavaypuram plates refers to the King there as
Manusamanan, one who was the equal of Manu; the date of that
grant is the 45th regnal year (908 A.D.) of Varaguna (or Vira
narayana, his younger brother?) Thus the comparison to Manu in
15

the copper plate grants would support the view that the grants
were all made on the basis of the code of dharma laid down in
the Smritis. (It is of course usual to compare great and just rulers
to Manu, but here in virtue of what has happened, the
comparison is quite appropriate and is invested with a special
significance.)
Line 114. Mel nal: means in times long ago and does not mean
in the recent past.
Line 114. Nin guravaral : By your ancestors; this will certainly
not mean your immediate ancestor, not 'your father', as one
writer has said. It will mean an ancestor in the distant past. The
king later on also says (line 124) em guravaral tarappattadu:
gifted by my ancestor. Had it been merely father, the petitioner
would have said 'nundai' (your father) as in the Sangham poetry
or Periya devar or Periya perumal as in the later epigraphical
records, and the king also would have said 'ended' (my father) or
Periya devar. In the vaidika tradition guru means preceptor ; guru
is singular and guravah is plural in Sanskrit; in the Tamil language
it is guravar, here an honorific plural. The parents as well as the
ancestors can be called guravar.
Line 114. Palmuraiyin valuvamai means in strict hereditary
enjoyment (vide line 124 also).
Line 118 Palyaga mudukudumi ennum Paramesvaranal: The
petitioner is here standing before the king and giving out his oral
16

plaint. If he were merely referring to the king's father he would

have quite naturally referred to him as your mighty father. This
would have been much more simple and would also have tickled
the vanity of the king in no small measure. The king would also
have taken it as a greater duty to set right a wrong done to a gift
recently made by his own father. The terminology used here does
not warrant such an interpretation. To extol Peruvaludi, the
petitioner says he is Paramesvaran, because by reason of the
long period of time that has elapsed his greatness is not
remembered and has to be recalled by the use of such words.
The lengthy and round about manner in which the king and his
gift are here referred to gives us the impression that however
great this Valudi might have been, the matter of the grant had
become obscure, and to some extent gone out of man's memory.
This implies a long period of interval between the grant and the
petition for restoration. Hence the long interval of time between
the two events read by the scholars is fully justified.
Lines 122-123. Nattal-nin palamaiyadal katti rii kolka. Nattal
tan palamaiyadal kattinan: Here in both the places nattal, would
signify with the aid of documentary evidence'; nattu means
writing, a document. See also clause 5 above. It would appear as
though two of the three pramanas or evidences as required in the
dharma sastras are satisfied in this case - enjoyment with
possession, and documentary evidence.

17

Lines 126-7. Kamakkani Nar-chingan: This is the name of the

petitioner. Kamakkani means right to property. Earlier we saw
that the original donee in the days of Mudukudumip Peruvaludi
was Korkai kilan Nar Kotran. Now after so many years, not only
three centuries till the date of Kadumkon (575 A. D.), but after
many more years till the days of Parantakan Nedunjadaiyan's
third regnal year (about 768 A. D.) appears Korkaikilan
Kamakkani Nar-chingan and makes his petition. The point to be
carefully noted here is that Nar-chingan is a name different from
Nar-kotran of the earlier period. Probably the father of Narchingan was Suvaran, as Singan is called here (in line 17 of the
prose portion, as Korkaikilan Kamakkani Suvaran Singan. It
should be clearly borne in mind that Singan and Kotran are
different individuals of different periods. (Suvaran Singan means
in contemporary Tamil usage Singan son of Suvaran.)
Line 123. Angu-appolude: The two words would indicate to us
that the king was satisfied with the truth of the claim now made
and re-issued the grant, without the least hesitation. The dharma
sastras provide for such re-issue of grants on copper plate
tamarapatra pramanam kalpayitva diyatam when the original
had been irrecoverably lost.
We find here that the petition for the restoration of the
property is made by a descendant of the original donee many
centuries after the seizure of the land by the Kalabhras. Why was
there so much delay in making the claim ? The Kalabhras ruled
18

for three centuries, during which period the claim naturally could
not have been made. Then came Kadumkon. From Kadumkon to
Nedunjadaiyan we have seven ruling monarchs. We can only infer
that the successors of Narchingan either did not have the
boldness to appear before the king and put in a petition, or that
they did not get the original document of the grant of
Mudukudumip Peruvaludi and so did not know their right and
muster up enough courage to call upon the king to restore their
right.
It is also possible that some earlier descendants of Narkotran
did make a petition to the king but they were not sympathetically
listened to and nothing was done.
The Velvikkudi grant gives us only one instance of a dharma
which had been stopped by the Kalabhra rule. There certainly
would have been many more. All similar confiscations had not
come into the picture of the epigraphical evidence. We have only
to imagine the conditions. Besides, the defeat of the Kalabhras
by Kadumkon does not tell us much about the life complex of the
period. All the details have to be collected by the suggestions in
the literature of the period and later.

WHO WERE THE KALABHRAS?

We find scholars giving wholly divergent solutions to the
problem of the Kalabhras. One says that the Kalabhras were only
Tamilians and they were in revolt against the Brahmin ritual of
sacrifices in the land; in his view the Kalabhras were just
19

revolutionaries. He says they were even Hindus and even

Tamilians. Another says that there was no interregnum and no
up-setting of the estabiished political order, that the Kalabhras
were merely the Gangas, their occupation of the Pandiya terrain
was only short-lived, not extending beyond a period of a couple
of years, that they had made only border line encroachments or
incursions, that the invaders were also Saivas, patronizing
Brahminical rituals and religion, and so on. It is not my purpose
here to answer all these wild, uncritical and confliciting series of
misconceptions. But we shall try to get at the correct position
with reference to a proper interpretation of the terms of the
Velvikkudi grant which is the basis for the proposition of the
Kalabhra occupation of Madurai.
The name Kalabhra is no where found in any literature except
the few epigraphical records of the Pandiyas and the Pallavas.
Both the Pandiya Kadumkon and the Pallava Simhavishnu who
headed new and itiwortant lines of the two dynasties Pandiya and
Pallava respectively, both by the end of the 6th century (about
575 A. D.), have recorded that they overcame the Kalabhras. The
name is totally unknown in early Tamil literature and history. The
name Kalabhra is written in both the Pandiya and the Pallava
inscriptions in the grantha script (Sanskrit) but the name is
unknown in the Sanskrit language. The language of the Kalabhras
has been known to be Prakrit and Pali, possibly early Kannada
also. They were followers of Jainism in some places and of
20

Buddhism in others. Hence they are correctly thought to be aliens

on the Tamil soil.
We know from the Velvikkudi grant that the Kalabhras had
been overthrown and their rule ended by about 575 A.D. by
Kadumkon. But we do not know definitely the beginning of their
rule, or in other words, when they entered the Pandinad and
seized power at Madurai. Scholars of Tamil literary history have
come to the conclusion that probably the middle of the third
century (250 A.D.) may be taken as the date of the fall of the
earlier Pandiya dynasty. Silappadhikaram, the great Tamil epic
which glorifies woman and her accomplishing arts - music and
dance - would have been written by the first half of the century,
quite in conformity with Tamil Cultural Traditions, at a period
when the Kalabhras had not usurped power at Madurai. This
seems to have been generally accepted and so gives us the date
250 A.D. as the date of origin of the Kalabhra rule in Madurai.
The next important question is, who were the Kalabhras and
wherefrom did they come.
The term Kalabhra (Kalabhara) is not mentioned any where in
the Sangham poetry. Besides, when Varahamihira (505-587 A.D.)
mentions the kings of the south, he does not mention the name
Kalabhra, Hence it is clear that the Kalabhras were not an ancient
dynasty or clan.

THE SATAVAHANAS
21

The Satavahanas ruled over India from the period of Asoka's

death (B.C. 232) to about 227 A.D. Their territory extended from
the northen parts of Mysore to the Narmada in the north and
from the confluence of the Godavari with the sea, west up to the
Western Ghats. The decline of the Satavahana Empire in the first
quarter of the third century A.D. loosened the bonds which had
restrained the disruptive forces there which resulted not only in
internecine wars but also in the expeditions of adventurous clans
to seek their fortunes elsewhere. We may not be wrong if we
connect one such clan with the Kalabhra tribe which invaded
Pandinad by the middle of the third century A.D. (250) and
overthrew the Pandiya rule. But there is no evidence to admit this
hypothesis. Later on we shall be able to show that the Kalabhras
of Madurai were merely one branch of a clan which started on a
predatory march from the Sravanabelgola area simultaneously
into several parts of Tamilnad.

THE KALABHRAS AND THE GANGAS

The Gangas were known to the early Tamil writers. Ahananuru
mentions Gangan. [Verse 44 mentions the Ganga as a chief of
great might along with several others, all of whom the Chola
chief Perum-poot-Chenni defeated].
Silappadhikaram mentions Gangar along with the rulers of six
other areas whom Senkuttuvan engaged in battle.
[Silappadikaram Katchikkadai lines 156-8].

22

Since the Pandiya inscription mentions only the Kalabhras as

the rulers at Madurai, and not the Gangas as the invaders or the
rulers, the inference is that the two were different. The Gangas
are known in the period; the composer of the grant mentions the
Ganga raja in line 79. Hence it is definite that the Kalabhras were
definitely construed to be different from the Gangas.
The Gangas ruled over the territory mentioned in Tamil contemporary literature as Erumainadu (erumai-buffalo). [It is not
known how this land had come to be known as the Erumainadu.
Probably some people of the place at the time were black (and
perhaps also short) and stout like the buffalo and so their land
might have been called the Erumai nadu]. The land is the modern
Mysore State. Erumai in Tamil is Mahisham in Sanskrit and shows
that what was just across the border from Tamil nad and was
designated as the Erumai nadu by the Tamil people, came
gradually to be called the Mahisha nadu Mysore (capital city).
Erumainadu was outside the Tamilnadu proper; it is not mentioned as one of the twelve lands where Tamil was spoken. The
rulers of the Erumai nadu were even called Erumai. [Vide
Ahananura 115 where the chief is called Erumai]. Kudanadu is
one of the areas of Sen Tamil nadu and it forms part of modern
Mysore (Karnataka). Some times the ruler of Erumainadu had
captured Kudanadu and so an Ahananuru verse calls Kuda nadu
as the land of one Erumai. [Ibid. Sometimes Erumai nadu had

23

been captured by the Vadubar and it is shown as belonging to

them. This is explained later].
The ruler of Erumainadu was always at loggerheads with the
Pandiya in the opening years of the Christian era. We find that
the Erumaiyuran was one of the foes whom Nedumcheliyan
vanquished in the Talaiyalanganam battle. [Vide Ahananuru 36
lines 15-20]. However we should remember that the land
Erumainadu gets a royal dynastic rule only from Konkani varman
I (c. 340-400 A.D.). It is clear therefore that there was no Ganga
rule at the time of the Kalabhra invasion of the Pandiya country
in about 250 A.D. From the middle of the next century the
Erumainadu ruled by the Gangas comes to be known as
Gangavadi, and as Gangapadi in the Chola inscriptions from the
Tenth century onwards.
There are besides two references to Erumai in Sangham
literature. One is that it is the name of a poet Erumai Veliyanar
who has sung two verses in Purananuru (273 and 303) and one in
Ahananuru (73); his son is Kadalanar, author of one verse in
Ahananuru (verse 72). Erumaiveil might have been a tract or
piece of land (probably in Madurai itself) and somehow the poet
seems to have been known by that name; he might have
belonged to that region. The second is a puram theme, known as
erumai maram [The theme is metioned not in Tolkappiyam, but in
the latter Purapporulvenba malai; but the commentator has
applied the term to some verses in Purananuru for explaining
24

them] a hero taking a firm and bold stand in the battle field
against very heavy odds, like an unyielding buffalo, even after his
own army had retreated and fled.
Another point of interest here is that the Erumaiyuran, enemy
of Nedumcheliyan, has now become the Ganga in the Sixth
century and the Velvikkudi grant (line 85) says that Man-ter
Maran had a sambandham with Ganga raja the king of Kongunad
wearing fragrant garlands. Sambandham weans marriage
alliance, as we use the term today. These Gangas are the
Western Gangas of Talkad (Talaikkad ). The Velvikkudi grant itself
says that the Anatti (the officer who defeated the Chalukyas
when they tried to prevent the marriage of the Ganga's daughter
with the Pandiyan Parantakan Nedumjadaiyan who is the donor of
the Velvikkudi grant. This indicates that at this period of the grant
(575 A. D.) there was cordial relationship between the Pandiya
and the Ganga kings. Again, when the poet drafted this grant in
this poetic form for inscribing on the copper plate, we find he
uses the Sanskrit script for the word Ganga as he does frequently
for many other words. So the word Ganga is well known to the
poet. Hence since the poet has not used the word Ganga but has
preferred the word Kalabhra, he is definite that the two are
different. The Tamil writer would not have bothered to make the
distinction between one branch of the Gangas and another, and
so if the invading tribe was really a Ganga tribe, he would have
simply said Ganga, instead of taking the trouble to put it down
elaborately as Kalabhra the Kaliarasan. This decides this
25

particular issue finally : the Kalabhras are not Gangas nor could
they have been the forerunners of any branch of the Ganga
dynasty.
There is an attempt to associate the Kalabhras with the
Gangas in another way. Kalabha means a young elephant. The
Gangas had the elephant on their banner. Hence Kalabhras had
the elephant banner, had been known as Kalabhas and then
Kalabhras. Very ingenious indeed. But no where have we any
information about the banner of the Kalabhras much less that
they had an elephant banner. So these are merely fanciful,
unscientific etymological exercises.

KALIDEVA AND KALI KULA

It has been suggested and ably argued that the term
kaliarasan may refer to the Kalikulam. Kalikulam as the name of a
dynasty is mentioned in the Kopparam plates of the Chalukya
King Pulikesin II. Kaliyabda (era) was also prevalent in South
India. We find the consecration of the colossal statue of
Gommatesvara at Sravana belgola mentioned in Kali era as 983,
which suggests that that era commenced by 383 A. D. There was
also said to be a Kalideva cult prevalent in the Kannada country
and it was prevalent in some parts of the Kannada area till the
eleventh centurry. They were also Jains. All these points have
been marshalled together to suggest that kaliyarasan in the
Velvikkudi grant may after all be just a reference to the Kalikula.

26

But there is a strong objection to such an assumption of the

name of a tribe or dynasty of Kali with reference to the
Kalabhras. Buddha datta refers to the Kalabbha kula; in Pali, the r
sound is softened and the term Kalabhra can sound only as
Kalabbha in Pali. Accuta Vikkanta is of the Kalabbha kula, or
Kalabhra kula. So it is clear that when Kalabhra itself can be the
name of a kula, there cannot be an additional kula added to the
name as Kalikula when referring to the Kalabhras of the
Velvikkudi grant. And again, when we look at the phrase
'Kalappalar kulam kalaindum' in the Dalavaypuram plates, we
have to take it that the term Kalappalar or Kalabhrar was itself a
kulam; so no addition of a kali kulam can be made. Besides the
three Pallava copper plates refer to Kalabhra along with the
Chola, Pandiya, Malaya etc. signifying that the term Kalabhra is
itself the name of a kula, tribe or dynasty just like the others.
Hence it is clear here that a second dynasty or tribe name could
not be attached to the name of Kalabhra. Therefore the term
kaliarasan has now to be taken only in the accepted sense of a
common noun as cruel, conceited or tyrannical (not wicked or
brave), and not as a proper noun.
We shall remember the grant is in verse, or poetic
composition, written by a competent poet. He would have used
the word kali in a classical meaning, that of a tyrant, an evil doer,
a cruel person ; the other senses cannot be applied to kali.

27

Besides, the date of the Kali era may not quite fit in. It is
generally agreed that the Kalabhra rule in Pandinad was for
about 300 years from about 250 A.D. The Kalabhras who invaded
the country at this time could not have belonged to the kula
which came into existence and established an era in its own
name from 383 A. D.

THE KALVAR CLAN

Some try to derive the word Kalabhra from the Tamil word
kalva as kalava kalavara kalabara and kalabhra and so
they go on to say that the Kalabhrar belong to the Kalvar (robber
group) which is given as a dynastic name with reference to Pulli
of Venkatam. According to them Kalabhra is a Sanskritized form
of the common Tamil word kalvar. Kalva is a thief, a robber and it
is ordinarily steya in Sanskrit. There will be nothing wrong if it is
rendered into Sanskrit as the Steyakula. This is much more easy
and simple than a Sanskritization. Since this has not been done,
it is evident, that Kalabhra could not have been an evolution from
the word kalvar.
Equating Kalabhra with Kalavar and Kalvar, we have heard
some critic say that the great Vaishnava saint Tirumangai alvar
also belonged to the Kalabhra clan, as he frequently calls himself
Kaliyan. But the meaning of Kaliyan as used by the Alvar is
different. Kaliyan is given as the term for a military commander
in the Divakaram, a Tamil lexicon of the 9th century. The Alvar
here uses the word in the sense of Kalikanri, a suppressor of Kali;
28

in Sanskrit the name is frequently given as Kalidhvamsah and

Kalivairi, which mean the annihilator and the foe of Kali. Because
of this term and because the legend pictures this Alvar as a
highway robber purely in a legendary manner, probably to
enhance the value of the change in him into a bhagavata, he
cannot be taken to be a Kalabhra. Alvar is very much Later in
time (8th C. A.D.)
Many fanciful etymologies are invented for the term in the
modern day. It is futile to relate a term (now completely
forgotten) applied to a clan of the 3rd century A. D. and later, in
the epigraphical records of the 7th century, to the modern
etymological theories of the 20th century and invent new
explanations and affiliation. The simplest thing to say is that we
do not know, because we do not have sufficient evidence. But it
is a known fact that the Kalabhras were an alien clan and today
we are at a loss to know what the name represented in the past
in the Kannada (or the Prakrita) language.
It is interesting to note that the term kalebharam has given
rise in the modern day to several meanings like confusion, tumult
etc. Kalabharam in Sanskrit and Tamil means the human body;
Saints Appar and Sundarar use the term in this sense. The Tamil
term kalavaram of unknown origin means confusion and tumult.
It always occurs in the spoken form today as kalabaram to signify
commotion and tumult. Its phonological identity with Kalabhra,

29

the clan which caused considerable confusion and disorder in the

Pandinad seventeen centuries ago, is very striking.

PULLI OF VANKATAM
Pulli of Venkatam has been mentioned in connection with the
origin of the Kalabhras. He is mentioned in eight verses in the
Sangham poetry five by Mamulanar and three by Kalladar.
Except one verse in Purananuru, all the others are found in
Ahananuru and all these relate to the palai theme in love poetry.
The reference to Pulli occurs generally in the lines where the
mother of the heroine in the verse tries to describe the heat of
the desert, through which her daughter had eloped with her
lover, comparing it with the parched aridity of the Venkatam hill
ruled by Pulli.
The following is a summary of the various references :
Venkatam in the wide region ruled over by Pulli; the tall hill
Venkatam with bamboo forests of Pulli who fights with his large
elephants ; like the hill of Venkatam belonging to Pulli; festive
and prosperous Venkatam of the great giver Pulli, who wears the
kazhal on his feet and who vanquished the Mazhava country; the
forest of Pulli hill which is hard to cross ; the desert in the land of
Pulli which is hard to cross ; Pulli the great giver, of unfaltering
good repute ; the good land, with the hill where hang
honeycombs, of boastful Pulli with many herds of cows. [Vide
verse 385 of Purananuru ; here the poet Kalladar praises his
patron Ambarkilan Aruvandai and Pulli is merely mentioned by
30

comparison with his Venkatam ; Ahananuru verses 83, 209 by

Kalladar and verses 61, 259 311, 393 by Mamulanar].
From these references we find that Pulli was ruling over
Venkatam during the period of the Sangham poetsy, probably
some 200 years earlier than the Kalabhra raid over Madurai, that
he was a bounteous patron and was chief of the Kalvar (clan).
Kalvar is a Tamil word meaning robber, and by no stretch of
imagination can we say that Pulli a chief of the period was
celebrated as a robber chief. Kalvan means also a black person
and perhaps he might have been called Kalvarkoman the black
chief (like the Black Prince of England, Richard I). Some have
argued that 'the word Kalvar in the palm leaf could as well have
been read as Kalavar (without the dot on the Tamil letter la,
because the dot is never marked in palm leaf); and so they would
say that Kalavar is the Tamil form for Kalabha, which means an
elephant. We find his valour celebrated in the verses and also his
elephant and so he could have been a valiant chief with an
elephant force. Kalabha had probably got further changed into
Kalabhra; the Kalabhras can be just descendants of this chief of
elephants'.
It is certainly possible that kalvar could have been kalavar but
the language of the Sangham poetry would not warrant the use
of the Sanskrit term Kalabha for the elephant in the Velvikkudi
grant. If the name was really anything like kalvar or kalavar,
naturally the Tamil epigraphic composer would not have ignored
31

it in preference to an unknown and unfamiliar word Kalabhra and

would not have taken pains to put it down in the Sanskrit script
as Kalabhra in the middle of a Tamil poetic line.
And lastly, it may not be appropriate to take the Kalabhras to
the Venkatam region, the region of the Vaduhar in later history in
the face of two references in Tamil classical literature to the
conquerors of Madurai as Karunatar (in Kalladam and in
Periyapuranam).
It is interesting to note that a copper plate grant of a later day
mentions one Pulliyur. The Kosakkottai copper plates issued in
the twelfth year of the reign of Konkanyadhirajar record a grant
made by the mother of the Pallava king Simhavishnu (575 - 615)
to build a Jain temple for the glorification of the Pallava line. The
grant is inscribed in the old Telugu-Kannada script. It gifts away a
place called Pulliyur, in the Ganga territory, the temple is built on
land donated by the Ganga King. This would indicate the happy
relations between the Gangas and the Pallavas of the period. A
line (33) on the reverse of the fourth leaf of the grant says that
he who appropriates land gifted by himself or by some others will
suffer for 60,000 years in a dark hell. It goes to state further the
sin and punishment that will accrue to such an offender. Viewed
in the light of such thoughts of sin and merit of a later day, we
can realize how heinous a crime was the forfeiture by the
Kalabhras of the Velvikkudi original gift.

32

Strangely enough, an Ahananuru verse [342] calls Pandiya the

Tennan as the Kalvarperumahan the great kalvar hero. This may
be probably by virtue of a battle the Pandiya might have fought
with the Kalvar as Kalvarperumahan. But the verse does not give
the name of either the Pandiya or the Kalvar chief. It is also
doubtful if a crowned monarch of the great Pandiya dynasty
would take upon himself the undignified title of Kalvar
perumahan.
It is admissible in only one light and that is that the king was
the chief of the raiders (Kalvar) who went out into the enemy
territory and captured their cattle in the true Vetchi-tinai
tradition.

VADUHAR AND THE KALABHRAS

A reference to the Vaduhar may not be absolutely necessary
here, in a discussion of the Kalabhras, but still as they were
considered to occupy the area north of Tamilnad proper in the
past, a few observations may be made. Very ancient books
mention the Himalayas as the northern boundary of the
Tamilnad. [Vide Purananuru 6 and 17 ; Maduraikkanji lines 70-72].
But however in a later day, the area had been restricted and the
Venkatam hill had been specified as the northern boundary. [Vide
the Sirappup-payiram of Tolkappiyam, of Nannul etc. Sikhandi
cited by Adiyarkkunallar].
The land beyond Venkatam was called the land where the
language had changed and the people there had been called
33

Vaduhar. [Kuruntohai 11, Narrinai 212, Purananuru 378 and many

verses in Ahananuru mention the Vaduhar]. One line refers to
them as the people whose language had not developed.
[Ahananurn 107]. In later days Vaduhu had been used to denote
the Telugu people and their country. A further development in the
concept of Vaduhu was to designate some musical modes as
vaduhu [Vide Pingala nighantu which mentions Vaduhu as a
secondary melody type of the maruda yal and also as the
Indalap-pann]. Silappadhikaram would say that vaduhu was one
of the three types of dances desi (native), vaduhu (from that
country) and simhalam (from the Sinhalese country, modern Sri
Lanka). [Verse 342 of Ahananuru]. Adiyarkku-nallar the
commentator (12th century) of Silappadhikaram says that in his
day the languages in the north were all undeveloped languages.
[Silappadhikaram, chapter 8 lines 1-3 commentary]. It had not
been suggested that the Kalabhrar had anything to do with the
Vaduhar and so we need not concern ourselves with them any
further. However one more reference to the Vaduhar may be
noted, where the Erumainadu is said to belong to the Vaduhar
chief. [Ahananuru 253]. But this might have been probably due to
an imperfect knowledge of the land beyond the northern borders.
It had been the habit among the poets of the period to make a
confusion of the two terms Vaduhu and Karnataka as we find in
the words of even Sekkilar as Vaduhak-karunada vendan. Hence
in view of what has been explained already, we may take it the
34

Vaduhar do not come into the picture at all and that the Erumai
nadu mentioned by many is part of the Karunataka nadu.
Two hills mark the place Sravana Belgola in the Karnataka
state. They are known as the Dodda betta the larger hill and the
Chikka betta the smaller hill. The Chikka betta is also known as
Chandra giri, in memory of Emperor Chandragupta maurya.
There is a Kannada tradition that the Jaina acharya Bhadrabahu
who was at Ujjaini foresaw a famine of twelve years there and,
not willing to get affected by it, he moved south and came to this
area, with his disciples. Chandragupta maurya, the father of
Emperor Asoka, opted for Jainism at the end of his reign, became
a disciple of Bhadra bahu and, abdicating his throne in favour of
his son Asoka, followed his master to the south as a sannyasi on
foot. After the passing away of Bhadrabahu, Chandra gupta also
stayed on here in a cave doing penance and gave up his life by
298 B. C. by performing sallekhana in the true Jain fashion. These
stories have been recorded in later Kannada writing.
Historians have remarked that since nothing is recorded about
the end of Chandragupta, this story, legend though it be, may be
accepted. Thus we may see that the Sravana Belgola area was
an important centre in the South for Jainism from the early
period, even long before the Christian era. It may also be
remembered in a general way that the Asokan edicts are found
upto the Kannada country but nowhere in the Tamil country.

35

Sravana Belgola (in Tamil, the Jain white tank, sravana

samana, belvellai, golakulam) is the place between the two
hills mentioned and is about 60 miles north of Mysore. It is world
famous by the statue of Gommatesvara created there in a single
piece of stone reaching to a height of 57 feet from the ground
level. The statue is naturally the most imposing sight, second
perhaps only to the statues of Rameses in Egypt. It was caused
to be constructed by Chamundaraya the minister of the Gangas
in 983 A. D. Many sub-temples were constructed around the site
by 1116. There are about 500 Kannada inscriptions in the area,
many of which are ancient. By association with Bhadrabathu and
Chandragupta, the place had grown to be the most important
centre for Jainism in the South. Literary history tells us that the
period was one of peace in Tamilnad so far as incursions form
outisders were concerned. There were always internecine
quarrels among the three dynasties of crowned monarchs here,
the Seras, the Pandiyas and the Cholas, but the religion and
literature at Madurai had a peaceful atmosphere. Possibly there
were peaceful migrations from the Sravana Belgola area into the
South, Pandinad, by the Jain monks and if the rockbeds around
Madurai are really Jain, they will be explained by these
migrations. The hospitable Tamil people would certainly have
helped these migrators from a foreign linguistic area in the
monk's robe to stay at peace and work up their sallekhana. As is
evident from the literature of the period, they had no religious or

36

social influence in the Tamil country, particularly the Pandiya

country then.
Now coming to the Sravana belgola hills, we find that in the
old Kannada inscriptions, the Chikka hill is designated as
Kalavappu (Kalvappu) and Kalabappu in Kannada. It has been
fully discussed by R. Narasimhachar, editor of the Epigraphia
Carnatica Volume II (1923) which is wholly devoted to Sravana
belgola. We find that the place had been considered as a holy
place celebrated by the Jains of the area and around. Many other
monks are also said to have attained samadhi there. The place
had thus been one of great antiquity and veneration which had
been a centre for propagation and for the distribution of Jain
monks over the southern regions in later years.
The tribes of marauders or invaders into the three areas of
Tamilnad beginning from the south, Madurai in Pandinad,
Kaverippattinam in Cholanad and Kanchi in Tondainad, all on the
banks of rivers, by about the middle of the 3rd century A. D. have
all been called the Kalabhras and all of them belonged to a
region other than Tamilnad, whose language was not Tamil, and
whose religion was not the vaidika religion. Their place of origin
can easily be seen to be the west in the period. It is quite likely
that they would have been known in the areas they invaded by
the known place of their origin and it is not likely that any
dynastic name could have been attached to them because of the
simple fact that they did not belong to any dynasty; they would
37

have been known only by the tract from which they hailed. These
people would have been called Kalabhras, from Kalabappu. The
Tamil people of Madurai would have scant knowledge of the
Sravana belgola area. Naturally the name Kalabappu would have
been corrupted into some Tamilized form. (In the modern day we
would normally refer to them as Kalabappuran, then Kalabhuran
and lastly Kalabhran). When the Meykkirtti was composed and
inscribed at Madurai in the Velvikkudi grant, they would have felt
the name should be spelt correctly, and not finding any Tamil
equivalent, would have given them a Sanskrit sounding name as
the Kalabhran. We do not know how they were called at the time
of the invasion in 250 A. D. nor at the time of Kadumkon's
overthrowal by 575 A. D. We have only the form adopted by the
officers in 768 A. D. when the grant was made again by
Parantaka Nedunjadaiyan. It is therefore quite appropriate to
consider the term as allied to Kalabappu and the invaders
themselves as a tribe originating from the Sravana belgola area,
in preference to any other view. In the absence of definite
recorded evidence, all other views are no doubt conjecture. The
above view may be seen to be the most appropriate.
An old inscription from Halmidi in Belur district of Karnataka,
quite close to the Sravana belgola area, mentions a local tribe
whom it calls Kalabhora. Here the Kadamba king Kakustha (about
425 - 450 A.D.) is said to be the foe of the Kalabhoras (Srimat Kadamba parityaga sampannan Kalabhorana ari). During this period
we know the Kalabhras had been successfully entrenched at
38

Madurai and also in Cholanad and in Kanchi. Kalabhra, Kalabha

kula (in Pali) at Cholanad and this Kalabhora are all
phonologically similar terms which simply signify the proliforatirn
of a single tribe in several areas through its various branches;
this particular only helps us to identify the different branches as
one in origin. We meet with the term Kalabhra in several
references, but not this form Kalabhora. Besides, this form in the
Kannada area helps us to identify them as a tribe outside the
Tamil linguistic areas, definitely as a tribe from the Kannada area
whose language could have been the Prakrit (or Pali). The
Sravana belgola area was an outlying area so far as the centre of
Tamil was concerned. Its language could have been some early
form of Tamil, since all the areas were classed as the Dravida
area in the period of the Sangham poetry. We have definite
recorded evidence in the shape of epigraphic records from
Halmidi from about 500 A.D. for the Kannada language. It is said
that Kannada was taking shape as a separate language even
from the first century A. D. It might have been just then emerging
from Tamil with Sanskrit influence through Prakrit and Pali. The
Kalabhras who marched on Madurai had as their spoken, tongue
this new emerging language along with some Prakrit, while for
their administrative and religious purposes they would have used
some kind of Prakrit or Pali, with Sanskrit, both of which were
developed languages when compared with the new emerging
Kannada of the period. This view seems quite sustainable in the
absence of any evidence of Kannada then, which of course
39

became the acknowledged language of the area in the later

centuries.

WERE THEY TAMILS?

One writer adduces many fanciful arguments to show that the
Kalabhras were indeed Tamils of the day. But the pains the scribe
of a later periods takes to inscribe the name in the Sanskrit
letters as Kalabhra in the middle of a line of Tamil verse definitely
clinches the issue, namely that the name was unfamiliar and
unwritable in the Tamil letters. He does not even try to write it as
Kalappirar (Tamilized form) ; he probably thought it not proper at
the time to write a foreigner's name in the Tamil script. Note also
that he writes Ganga in Sanskrit. All these prove that the
Kalabhras were foreigners. What was their language? Most likely
it was Sanskrit for writing, and Prakrit and Kannada for ordinary
speech.' If it was the Prakrit, the name would certainly have been
adapted into the Prakrita form as Kalabha, omitting the r sound
as we find in the Pali writing of Buddha datta in the fifth century.
The same writer has said that the Kalabhra period in the
history of Tamilnad was a golden period for the Jains. [K. P.
Aravanan, Jain Contribution to Tamil Grammar 1974, page 61,
page 69]. The statement may not be quite appropriate so far as
the literature is concerned, because no valuable works were
written by the Jains during this period. History tells us that the
Jains produced some of their best works, their greatest
contribution to the Tamil language and literature, in the age of
40

the Imperial Cholas. The Epics Cintamani and Culamani, the

grammatical works Yapparumkalam and Karikai with their valuable commentaries, Nannul and Nambi Ahapporul may be cited as
instances. But it is a fact that that period, the Kalabhra period,
was one of the worst periods in the culture of the Tamilnad, even
like the seizure of Madurai by Malik Kaffur in the first quarter of
the 14th century, and like the destruction of the Vijayanagar in
the next century by the Muhammedan forces. It is a distortion of
facts to say that the thriving of a small group of aggressors on
the suppression of the whole country was golden age for
anybody.
No ruler had ruled any country without leaving an important
imprint of his personality and culture on the land. The Kalabhras
as foreigners had left nothing in the land except their own rule of
suppression of the culture of the land. No Tamil ruler was ever
out to suppress any aspect of the Tamil culture.
Besides, although we find the Kalabhras ruling over the
Pandinad for a long period of more than three hundred years, we
do not see it as a dynastic rule. Apparently it seems to have been
just a story of subjugation of a land and its people, its arts, its
culture, language and religion by an alien tribe. It was just a
holding of the land against the will of its people, a story of
repression. The poets of the period have not made a single
reference to the tribe or to any of its leaders. In contrast, we may
note the eulogy paid on Accuta Vikkanta in Cholanad in the same
41

period, because evidently of his tolerant and benevolent rule.

Similar also is the case of the Muttaraiyar. Though the
Muttaraiyar had been a section of probably not the Kalabhras but
their adherents in the early period, they had not been liquidated
on the reassertion of supremacy by the Pandiyas. They seem to
have moved out into the Chola country where they had carved
out a substantial slice of the territory and ruled over it well, for
one or two centuries till the middle of the nineth century. They
seem to have merged with the people and shed their separate
characteristics. They had also helped the native sculptural and
architectural talent of the people by constructing temples like the
Sendalai Siva temple and the Tirumayam Vishnu temple. No
wonder we have some verses in their praise by good poets of
their court in inscriptional records,' though not in the literature
proper.
The Kalabhras did not come of any royal house. In that distant
past, only royalty had any personality. We find the personality of
royalty stamped on all literature, religious institutions and so on.
Thus the Kalabhra clan, devoid of any royalty, had nothing
positive to offer to posterity except their negative rule of
suppression of language and culture. They had of course
propagated their religion to the extent that at some periods the
royal house of Pandinad itself was Jain later on (as in Pallavanad
where also the royal Pallava house was also Jain for some time).
But this was only short lived, as the crusade of Tiru
Jnanasambandhar in the seventh century re-instated Saivism on
42

its own legitimate pedestal after which both Saivism and by its
supreme policy of tolerance Vaishnavism also grew in strength
and spiritual depth. St. Appar did the same thing in regard to the
royal Pallava house in Tondainad, but he did not follow the
aggressive path of the young saint Jnanasambandha but followed
the path of effecting a change of heart through his own
sacrifices.

CONCLUSION
So we have now some idea of the origin and nature of the
Kalabhras and the area they hailed from. They were not a
remnant of the Satavahana power which proliferated over the
entire Tamilnad. They had nothing to do with the Gangas nor with
any Kalikula. They were not descended from Pulli and they were
not Vaduhar. Their place of origin was not Venkatam or the
Erumainadu in particular, but only the area around Sravana
belgola, the originating centre of Southern Jainism after
Bhadrabahu and the legendary Chandragupta. They were not a
royal dynasty but only a predatory tribe, using Prakrit-Kannada,
which launched successfully a three pronged attack on the entire
Tamilnad front on Madurai, on Puhar and on Kanchi. They were
not of course Tamils. So far as Pandinad is concerned, the
Kalabhras did not bring about the extinction of the Pandiyas.
They drove them away from Madurai. This is clear from the
wording of the Velvikkudi grant (line 41), which says 'Pandyadhirajan velippattu', the raja (who was in exile till then) now
appeared to resume the sovereignty.
43

The Kalabhras did not occupy the entire terrain formerly ruled
by the Sera, Chola and the Pandiyas. The Pandiyas were
dislodged from their rulership at Madurai and the Cholas were
dislodged from their overlordship at Kaverippattinam (Puhar).
They had been having small territories under them and
successive generations of the Cholas and the Pandiyas were
waiting their time for reasserting themselves as overlords in their
territories at their own ancient headquarters. The Pandiyas had
been able to assert themselves and vanquish the Kalabhras at
Madurai by the end the 6th century, while in the other places the
Cholas were able to come into power only at a later stage, middle
of the 9th ' century; here again the Kalabhras had disappeared
and a new clan known to history as Muttaraiyar were having
sway over some parts of the Cholanad.

THE MUTTARAITAR
We may make a passing reference to the Muttaraiyar here in
the context of the Kalabhras and their rule in Madurai. Sendalai
inscriptions tell us definitely that the Muttaraiyar were a clan of
petty chiefs, who were some kind of feudatories under the
Pallavas. They were ruling over part of the land around Tanjavur
with their headquarters at Sendalai and Vallam. Their titles such
as marpidugu, videl-vidugu and pahap-pidugu etc. which are
Pallava titles, show their Pallava affiliation. Their records date
from the first half of the eighth century. They had been playing a
clever political game of convenience and probably their later
allegiance to the Pandiyas resulted in their total overthrowal by
44

Vijayalaya chola by 846 A. D. when he wrested Tanjavur, Vallam

etc. from the Muttaraiyar. Vijayalaya was at the time a feudatory
under the Pallavas, staying at Palaiyarai, one of the ancient Chola
capitals. He was obviously waiting for a favourable opportunity to
hoist the Chola standard and this occasion of his success over the
Muttaraiyar entrenched him strongly at Tanjavur, though yet a
vassal under the Pallavas. It was left to his son Aditya to raise his
independent banner by about 880 A.D. (battle of TirupPurambiyam). The occupation of Tanjavur by Vijayalaya was a red
letter day in the history of Tamilnad and of South India; it evolved
a new dynasty of Imperial Cholas which lasted for well over four
centuries till 1279.
This gives us no doubt particulars about the passing out of the
Muttaraiyar as a separate force in the political history of the area
but we do not know anything about their origin. The name itself
has baffled scholars. Some would take it as mut-taraiyar, those
who had the three lands, Sera, Chola and Pandiya under them.
This does not appear to be plausible. By the time we come to
hear of Muttaraiyar in Tamilnad history, Seranad had isolated
itself and Pandinad and Cholanad were being ruled by separate
dynasties and at no period of time (except in the later Imperial
Chola period) can any one ruler be said to hold sway over all the
three areas.

45

The Muttaraiyar are met with in inscriptions from the eighth

century and they are not heard of after the nineth. Hence also
this meaning cannot fit.
Another writer says that the term is Muttu-arasar, the princes
of pearls; they were engaged in pearl fisheries and they were
minavar (sembadavar) or fishermen. As evidence, he remarks
that they had the fish on their banner. (The fish as is well known
was the banner of the Pandiyas.) Even this seems to be a wild
guess, as nowhere have we so far heard that the fishermen were
ruling over any part of the land. No one has so far come forward
with the explanation that the Muttaraiyar were so called because
they were the wearers of the muttarai which was an ancient
piece of jewel, a waist band made of pearls. [Vide
Silapladhikaram, Chapter 6 line 87; another name for muttarai is
given as virisikai]. The wearer of muttarai is naturally a
muttaraiyar. Ignoring these explanations we have to confess that
the term is obscure at this stage.
Leaving alone these conjectures, we may now examine some
facts. Some of the hero stones newly discovered in North Arcot
district and other places seem to throw considerable light on the
Muttaraiyar. One refers to Vanako-rnuttaraisan who defeated and
killed his uncle Pon-mantanar. From an examination of other
similar hero-stones, some information has been brought to light
regarding several Muttaraiyar' who had been chiefs in various
areas from the days of Pallava Narasimha Varma I (630-669) to
46

the days of Nandivarma II (710-715) early eighth century A. D.

Sendalai inscriptions had given us some details regarding
Perumpidugu Muttaraiyan I, Kuvavan Maran, Maran
Paramesvaran and Perumpiduku Muttaraiyan II Svaran Maran.
Fresh evidence has now been gathered to show that there were
about five chiefs beginning from Pon-Mandan, who were the
ancestors of Suvaran Maran. The full list of.eight covers the
period Narasimha varman I to Nandivarman II.
The affinity of the Muttaraiyar to the Kalabhrar may also be
established by a lingustic evidence. The names of some of the
Muttaraiyar who were chiefs are as shown below: Kuvavan (5),
Kuvavan Maran (6), Kuvavan Sattan (7), Suvaran Maran (8).
These names make us ponder. There was no word or name in the
Tamil language in the past corresponding to the term Kuvavan. It
is a foreign word. Hence it stands to reason that the owner of the
name was definitely of foreign descent. This confirms the view
that these chiefs were of a foreign descent and in the context,
might have been of Kalabhra extraction.
Then the word Suvaran. This is also a very unusual term. Nine
verses are found in Sendalai celebrating the battles and victory
of Suvaran Maran at Alundur, Manalur, Kodumbalur, Kandalur,
Konadu etc. These words occur in the epigraphs of Suvaran
Maran. There is also another verse celebrating Suvaran
Mapputan cited in the commentaries of Tolkappiyam,
Tapparumkalam etc. The name Suvaran was an enigma to most
47

scholars at the time and it did not make any sense. So it was
read from the palm leaf manuscripts variously as Suvarnamapputan (suvarna is gold, and Putan is Bhutan, a familiar
proper name of the period), Suvana-mapputan (suvanam means
a dog) and so on. These are only pointed out to indicate that this
is also not a familiar name. Now of course it is known that
Suvaran is a contraction for Paramesuvaran. (Mapputan's father
was Paramesvaran). The confusion arose because Paramesvaran
is never shortened by the Tamils as Suvaran ; and so he who
contracts Paramesvaran as Suvaran was certainly not a Tamilian.
Thus on the strength of the two non-Tamil names, Kuvavan
and Suvaran, it is definite that these Muttaraiyar were not Tamils
but foreigners (that is coming from areas outside Tamil nad) and
history tells us that the only foreigners of any importance in the
earlier period were the Kalabhras.
Another point may also be emphasized here. Many of the
Muttaraiyar mentioned call themselves Maran. Maran is one of
the names of the Pandiya dynasty. It had been usual in the past
for the victor to assume the title of the vanquished. So when the
Pandiyas were overthrown by the Kalabhras, the Muttaraiyar as
probably a branch of the Kalabhrar, took on the title Maran for
themselves.
Although we are able to solve the problem of the Muttaraiyar
in this manner, accommodating all available facts, there is one
difficulty. We have said that Naladiyar, one of the 18 kilkkanakku
48

poems, next in importance and popularity only to Tirukkural, was

written probably by 450 A. D., prior to the establishment of the
Vajranandi Sangham at Madurai in 470 A.D. This book refers to
Muttaraiyar as Peru-Muttaraiyar (the great) in two of its verses.
The verses are:
"The base will eat the curry and rice gladly given by the peru
(great) Muttaraiyar. But to those who earnestly toil, even mere
water will taste like nectar although they might not have known
the name of curry".
"It is only they that are construed as poor who, though rich
among all the people of the world, do not give alms. But they are
Peru-Muttaraiyar who, though impoverished, do not beg of the
rich".
[Verses 200 and 296 of Naladiyar]
This was when scholars considered the poem Naladi to have
been written by the eighth century, because the (peru)
Muttaraiyar are mentioned here and the existence of the
Muttaraiyar at a period earlier than that was not known through
inscriptional evidence. Now we have references to them in the
early seventh century. But from purely literary considerations
however, we have remarked that the book can be taken to 450 A.
D., earlier than the Vajranandi sangham. The verses would mean
that the Muttaraiyar were there even by the middle of the fifth
century, although we have no inscriptional evidence for it now.
49

Naladi has been said to be composed by many poets, the

tradition being that there were 8000 Jain monks who were
leaving the Pandiya, that each composed one verse and left it
behind in order to console him as he was not willing to allow
them to go and that only 400 of such verses remained later to be
collected as Naladi, a poem of four-line venba verses. Now the
occurrence of the term Muttaraiyar in the book of the middle of
the fifth century admits of three explanations.
One, as said above, Naladi being a compilation, a book of
collected verses, it is possible that the original did not contain
exactly 400 verses; these two verses might have been written in
the seventh century or so and added on later at the time of the
arrangement of the verses in the 13th century by Padumanar.
But tradition cannot accept this, as it is considered that the
collection was made earlier, only once and that no addition was
made to it.
A second explanation is that the term Muttaraiyar in the
verses is not a proper noun but only a common noun. It means
only princely people decked with pearls. The first verse refers to
eating the food given by the Muttaraiyar, in an uncomplimentary
manner. The second verse is more clear in mentioning the term
as a common noun. This reasoning appears to be sound no
doubt, but again the question arises why the author coins such
an unusual word as this. We do not come across this word
anywhere else in all literature. And so, even if it be used as a
50

common noun here, it may be because there were some people

known really as Muttaraiyar, and the verses merely allude to
those people.
The third point is relevant here. The absence of any reference
to Muttaraiyar in inscriptions earlier than the seventh century
does not mean that they did not exist then. The Muttaraiyar as a
branch or section of the Kalabhras might have existed even from
the days of the Kalabhra raid on Madurai. Inscriptions of the early
period are few and the negative evidence does not prove the
non-existence of the Muttaraiyar in the fifth century.
All points considered, we have to conclude that the
Muttaraiyar existed by the middle of the fifth century and that
the term occurring in the two verses is not a definite mention of
the chiefs but may probably be only an allusion to them.
It may be interesting to know how the term was interpreted in
the period, earlier than epigraphic knowledge became available.
One commentary says: 'There was probably a person by name
Murttaraiyar who was freely giving food and idlers were feeding
upon it. There is also a legend that peru-Muttaraiyar ruled from
Muttarasanallur near Sri Rangam. The term can also be
interpreted as the three monarchs Sera, Chola and Pandiya or as
the Pandiya the Lord of the great pearls'.
In conclusion, we may say that the Muttaraiyar were there under the Kalabhras, as part of their tribe even from the time of
51

their invasion of the Pandinad and that later when the Kalabhras
themselves disappeared from history, these people lived in some
areas round Tanjavur and Vallam throwing in their lot with the
Pallavas and the Pandiyas whoever had the upper hand, until
finally they were completely liquidated as a political force by
Vijayalaya chola.
The term Muttarasar seems to have been adopted as a subtitle by some Ganga kings of a later day. The Ganga king Sri
Purusha (726 to 788 A. D.) calls himself Konkani muttarasa'. This
gives rise to interesting speculations. Probably the Muttarasara
(Muttaraiyar in Tamil) were probably Konkanis.
The Ganga King assumes the title Konkani muttarasa
apparently because he had vanquished the Muttarasar. From this
statement we can draw several conclusions. The Muttaraiyar
were probably a a section of the Kalabhras. They were naturally
different from the Gangas. But this should negative the theory
that the Muttaraiyar had anything to do with a fight with the
three monarchs Sera, Chola and Pandiya and that they defeated
them. Besides, this would support the theory or supposition that
the Muttaraiyar were also jains. Probably they were converted at
the time of Jnanasambandha's visit to Madurai, as we find later
Muttaraiyar to have built temples for Siva and for Vishnu and to
have followed the vaidika religion.

52

THE LANGUAGE AND RELIGION OF THE

KALABHRAS
THE LANGUAGE OF THE KALABHRAS
We do not have any direct evidence bearing on the language
of the Kalabhras. Their language was certainly not Tamil. We
learn that Satakarni who ruled the land bordering on the
Tamilnad of the 2nd century A.D. had issued coins in the bilingual
form, where pakata or prakrita was given on one face and Tamil
words were given on the other side. We can take it that persons
or tribes hailing from outside the Tamilnad had been using some
form of prakrit. So we may conclude that the Kalabhras were
using some kind of prakrit in their transactions. This prakrit might
have been the Ardha magadhi, [It is interesting to note here a
verse quoted in the Tapparunkalam commentary (a manual on
poetics and prosody written by a Jain in the 11th century); it says
that Magadam (as Ardha magadhi) was the language of Maliavira. A line in Tirukkalambakam (a Jain work of the 15th century,
verse 109) calls this language as the one common language for
all the eighteen languages. We may assume from this that it was
the practice for any language outside the Tamilnad, on the
borders of the Tamil speaking areas, to be called as prakrit or
pakata] with probably a smattering of Vadugu and Kannada also.
As the Kalabhras hailed from the Sravana Belgola area, we have
no difficulty in considering their regional language to be
Kannada. But the Kannada of the period was not a developed
53

language. Hence it may be more appropriate to say that the

language of the raiders as well as the educated and the cultured
among them was some kind of prakrit. It may also be of interest
to note here that the poet Jayamkondar (1105 A.D.) calling upon
the Karunataka damsels to come out and open their doors to the
victorious heroes returning from the Kalinga battle, addresses
them': 'O damsels of Karunataka who lisp a few words from the
Vadugu and more from Tamil, rise up and unlock the doors'.
Probably a section of the Kalabhras knew Pali and most of them
had of course a good knowledge of Sanskrit.
Speaking about the Jains of Madurai by about 650 A.D., Saint
Tirujnanasambandhar says that many were the languages used
by people of the world for worshipping the Lord but the Jains
deceitfully used all of them, that they speak the pakata (prakrit)
loudly; that their leaders go about like beasts without learning
the essence of the Sanskrit and the Tamil languages.1 St. Appar
says in his song on Palaiyarai-Vadatali, where he caused the Siva
temple closed by the Jains to be re-opened by the king, that the
Jains did not study the Tamil language and did not dedicate their
lives to God2. This will be understandable, because the Kalabhras
came from a different land, a different religion and culture, and a
different language, and so they did not care to learn the
language of the land which they conquered. This can easily be
understood from contemporary modern history. We have known
our British overlords of the recent past imposing their language
on all walks of life including education and administration. Even
54

their churches used the English language and the Latin language
for their rituals in the Tamilnad till a few years back. Such is
naturally the linguistic bigotry of the conquerors. No wonder
Appar has scolded them in this manner in the next century (7th).
Besides, he says in the same song that they spoke through
the nose. This naturally has reference to the prakrit which had
softened all harsh sound and made profuse use of the nasals. We
may also remember the ridicule which St. Sundarar, a generation
after Appar, heaps on them, imitating their nasal sounds, in a
song.3 All these would go to show that those in power, the
Kalabhras, did not set great score by the local or regional
language but stuck to their own language. The converts to
Jainism and the domiciled Jains probably after a few generations
had of course no difficulty in speaking and using the Tamil
language.
1 Sambandhar Devaram Book 3. 39. 2.
2 Appar Devaram Book 5. 58. 9.

3 Sundarar Devaram Book 7. 39. 9.

The establishment of the Dravida sangha at Madurai by
Vajranandi also supports this view. The Sangha was not called a
Tamil sangha, but was called a Dravida sangha; dravida was then
a word which had not entered the Tamil vocabulary either then or
even till a much later date. Digambara darsana saram was the
book published by Vajranandi in the sangham. Except for this we
have no record in any form of the existence of the Jain sangham
or its achievements in the fields of religion or language.
55

THE SHADOW OF THE KALABHRA RULE

The shadow cast by the Kalabhras had indeed been long. St.
Manikkavacakar who lived in the days of the Pandiyan Varaguna
II (862-880) was, according to the legends about him, a minister
of the Pandiya. In his soul-melting Tiruvacakam, we find one
decad of ten verses with the title Arut-pattu. This has the refrain
athenduve enru arulaye' in each of the verses. The concluding
lines in all the verses are : 'My Lord, when I fondly call you, who
do you not deign to reply to me, what is the matter ?" What is the
matter is represented in the text by the term, athendu. This is
not a Tamil term; it appears to be Kannada. It has been puzzling
all scholars and annotators. The term is a compound made up of
two words adu-that, and endu-what. Endu is not Tamil; in the
Kannada language it means, what. How does it happen that the
Kannada word is used by St. Manikkavacakar ? Trying to explain
this, some writers have even taken Manikkavacakar to modern
Bellary saying that he came from that area or that his guru came
from that area, and so, because he is familiar with the Kannada
language of that area, he uses this word here. This is not the
right interpretation. The Kalabhras were Kannada speaking
people and during their sway over Madurai, naturally many of
their terms had been used in the administration. Even after the
land had been rescued from them, remnants of their rule in the
form of terms and customs would have stayed on in the
administration, if not in the popular use. A remembrance of the
many English terms and the very many Urdu terms which still
56

linger in the administration and threaten to linger for ever in our

country today may make this clear. Manikkavacakar in the name
of Tennavan Brahma rayan was the minister of the Pandiya.
Naturally many of the residuary Kannada terms in the
administration would have been familiar to him, although they
might not have been familiar to the ordinary people. So
unconsciously this term endu, one such, could have crept into his
Tamil vocabulary. Quite naturally and very simply, he asks
adendu. The passing of three hundred years from the fall of the
Kalabhras to the days of Manikkavacakar does not make a
difference in the language of a person who was the
administrative head.

THE RELIGION OF THE KALABHRAS

The Kalabhras who seized power in Madurai by the middle of
the third century were Jains. Coming as they did from the area
around Sravana Belgola, they were a deeply religious clan which
was intent upon suppressing whatever was alien to their cult. The
group that went into Cholanad and seized power and was ruling
from Kaverippattinam was a Buddhist clan and we find that it was
not so very bigoted and intolerant as the clan that invaded
Madurai. We have relics of Jainism in pre-Kalabhra days in
Pandinad no doubt. But all of them relate to Jain monks who led a
retired life of self-negation and self-mortification. They even
commanded the respect of the people by their personal conduct
and austerities But the Jains in power were not the same. The
culture and the might of the Pandiyas were founded on their
57

religion. So naturally the first work of the invader was to

undermine and suppress the established religion of the land. The
lines from Kalladam, a poem which was earlier than Sekkilar's
Periyapuranam, bears evidence to this fact. "The Karunata king
who captured Madurai with his four-fold army drove away the
Pandiyas ; he was of the Aruhata persuasion and he closed down
all Siva worship." [Vide Kalladam verse 57, lines 12-14]. This is
clear and definite in labelling the intruder into Madurai as a king
from the Karnataka and of the Jain religion.
The political history of the Kannada territory tells us that its
earliest rulers including the later Gangas were all Jains. The
literature in the Kannada language was the Jain Puranas. It is
therefore no wonder the Kalabhras who hailed from that area
were ardent Jains.
The overthrowal of the Kalabhras by Kadumkon is quite significant. An enthusiastic writers has gone to great lengths and taken
great pains to formulate a theory that the Kalabhras were only
Tamil people, they were the spear-head of a native revolution
which rose against the brahmins who were imposing their Vedic
culture of sacrifices on a too willing Tamilian society, and the
whole thing was just an uprising against the growing bramin
influence and it voiced a cultural antagonism against the
brahmins. However, we know the course of history was otherwise
and the attempt to evaluate all ancient history and events by

58

modern political trends and values is neither scientific nor is it

real research.
The fusion of the Vedic culture with the indigenous Tamil
culture had taken place long before the dawn of the Christian era.
Tolkappiyam and the entire Sangham poetry reflects fully this
fusion. If the Kalabhras typify a revolt against the Vedic cult, it is
exactly because they were foreigners to the culture of the
Pandinad and not because they were Tamils. The Kalabhra
antagonism was not merely against any brahminism, it was
against all Tamil culture, as can be gleaned from the songs of Tiru
Jnanasambandhar.
We should not forget the major fact of history, that the Velvikkudi grant gives us a picture of a foreign impact on Madurai,
which was not merely the seat of one of the Tamil dynasties of
the ancient past, but was the arterial centre in the day, for all
that can be called Tamil language, literature, culture and religion,
for the whole of Tamilnad. The fusion of what is called the
Tamilian and the Aryan in all spheres had already taken place and
the society of the Sangham age is certainly a product of the
fusion. Kadumkon's overthrowal of the Kalabhras replaced the
Tamil language on its pinnacle of eminence, as otherwise it was
just possible that the prakrita of the Kalabhras might have
suppressed the native language. Kadumkon's action in the
political field was followed up by Tiru Jnanasambandhar in the
next century in the fields of language and culture, including
59

religion, and the Tamil nation once again came into its own. The
elaborate description given by him clearly vindicates his fight for
the vaidika religion in Tamilnad as against the religion of the
Kalabhras.
The Kalabhras had left no relics of their rule or activity and the
cumulative effect of all evidence then and later only shows that
they were Jains.

THE KALABHRA JAINS OF THE PERIOD

We are here concerned with the religious persuasion of the
alien tribe which invaded Madurai, drove away the Pandiyas then
ruling there, and established itself as the ruling power for a
period of three centuries, from the middle of the third century A.
D. The discussion here is merely academic and historical and has
nothing to do with the religious tenets of the Jains then or now.
The Kalabhras happened to be Jains and their rule resulted in a
suppression of the existing vaidika religion in the country at that
period. By vaidika religion we mean both Saivism and
Vaishnavism, the sects which accepted the authority of the
Vedas, named as Hinduism in later history. This has nothing to do
with Jainism as it is practised today anywhere in Tamilnad or
elsewhere. We are concerned with a foreign rule in the ancient
Pandinad of a period over 1700 years ago and the political events
then. Looking back, we should be able today to see the events in
the proper perspective and understand the trends and the course
of events in an objective and dispassionate manner.
60

The Jains were called in Tamil samanar. This term is the

Tamilised form of the word sramana, (samana through prakrit)
which means an ascetic. The basic faith of Jainism was that only
the ascetic, he who had fully renounced the world, could get
moksha or final release. Hence the Jains were called Samanar.
The Jains in India were of two categories - the Digambaras and
the Svetambaras. Digambaras (literally those whose garment
was the very quarters) went about naked; the South Indian (and
of course all the Tamilian) sect of Jains were the Digambaras ;
occasionally they wound round their loins the mat or the tree
bark; sometimes they even wore the saffron robe of the sannyasi.
The Svetambaras wore a white garment; they generally were
found in North India. The Nighantavadi whom we meet in later
polemic works was a digambara. (Nighanta means Nirgranta-one
who was free from the five attachments.) Digambara means of
course digambara sannyasi. Sambandhar also refers to some of
the Svetambara sect who went about in white.
We shall speak at length about the contribution of St.
Jnanasambandhar to Tamil and what he did to restore Tamil music
which had been suppressed by the Kalabhras. His contribution as
a Saiva saint in restoring Saivism in the Pandiya country is hailed
as his greatest contribution. His struggles with the contemporary
Jains had been dwelt at length in the Periya puranam. We may
note in passing that Vaishnavism was a parallel religion of the
period and there were also some important Vaishnava saints
61

contemporary with Sambandhar and later, but we do not know of

any who engaged in a struggle with the Jains. [In later years the
Vaishnavas had indeed a happy relatiouship with the Jains].
Now, Jnanasambandhar had to struggle with the remnants of
Kalabhra Jainism that he presents to us in his songs. The Jain way
of living was opposed to all the values and the culture of the
Tamils of the past and so Sambandhar had to fight the Jains in
order to restore the Tamil culture. It is worth while to have here a
composite picture of the Jains of the days of Sambandhar [Vide
Appendix Note B - Some rules of Jain discipline] as portrayed by
him in his sangs in different places. They represent the
descendants of the original Kalabhras, an alien element still. "The
Jains never bathed ; their body was clothed in perspiration. They
never bathed before food. Their hands were filthy. They never
cleaned their teeth. Even without washing their face and cleaning
their mouth, they used to eat their morning gruel. They ate their
food standing. Food was served to them on their hands. They
never took food after nightfall. They went about munching dry
ginger. They were heavy eaters. They were naturally stout
because of overeating. They went about naked. They did not
wear even a loin cloth. Women used to ridicule their nakedness
and close their doors whenever they went along the streets, but
they went about in a shameless manner. They wore not clothes
but mats or tree barks and even skin and hide. They plucked off
the hair on their heads and presented a shaven head.1 (This
gruesome act is indulged in by Jain ascetics even today.) They
62

were fond of colouring their hands with the paste of ground

marutanai leaves. They were always fond of a dialectic
disputation. The Kalabhras could lisp in many tongues (such as
Sanskrit, Prakrit, Kannada etc.) but they were not proficient in
Tamil (and hence the harm done to the Tamil language). They
were intolerant of other religions. They could not even tolerate
the very air if it had passed over persons wearing the sacred
ash.2 They never respected the wives of their teachers.3
All these traits are against the Tamil Culture. Early morning
bath taken before food, the table manners, reverence not only to
the teacher but equally to the teacher's wife, and a decent way
of dressing were all part of the ordinary culture of the Tamil
people. The Kalabhras coming from an alien land had scant
respect for the Tamil culture. The general mass of the people had
an ancient cultural heritage, but when the rulers had a different
culture,4 they would certainly be people who, in order to please
the ruler and get favours from him, always would like to tow the
line of the rulers. In this manner the culture of the land had been
considerably undermined. Besides, from the religious point of
view, they were all atheists who refuted the authority of Vedas.
So Sambandhar took the cudgels against all this.
1 St. Appar also makes an interesting reference to the practice. "The
Jains (ascetics) have women (presumably nuns) who never bathe with
covered breasts, to touch them in turns as their very gods and get the
hair on their head plucked ; thus they do useless acts, thinking that
they are penances, but do not know what is right" Devaram Book 6.
3. 11.
2 Sambandhar Deaaram Book 3. 108. 8.
63

3 Jnanasambandhar in his song at Tirukkudandaik-karonam says : They

are a people devoid of shame ; they do not know what is good ; they do
not honour their guratti ; (guratti is the feminine form of guru and
means here the wife of the guru.) In the Vaidika tradition, she deserves
as much reverence as the guru. Sambandhar accuses the Jains of not
respecting the gurupatni. Guratti may also mean here the nun.
4 The area of origin of the Kalabhras was a Tamil area before the
beginning of the Christian era but it had now taken on a different
colour, imbibing for some centuries at least, a different culture - vide
the section under the head Sravana Belgola.

Sambandhar besides reviving the Tamil language and its

music in the Tamilnad, fought for re-establishing the values in
social culture and this is the main reason for his bouts with the
Jains at Madurai. The alien rule had altogether effaced the native
Tamil culture in the land and so he fought strongly for restoring
that cultue. But Sekkilar wrote a purana for glorifying the Siva
bhakthas and Saivism and so the religious twist is always there in
the purana. But we should not forget the important mission and
work of Sambandhar which was to restore the ancient Tamil
culture.

KALABHRAS IN CHOLANAD AND TONDAINAD

A consideration of the impact of the Kalabhras in Pandinad will
not be complete without at least a passing reference to the
impact of the Kalabhras on the other parts of Tamilnad. Several
branches or divisions of the parental Kalabhra tribe started out
from the common home land and fanned out in various directions
into the Tamilnad. We have seen that the southernmost division
went along the Vaihai basin to Madurai, drove out the Pandiyas
and seized power there. Another branch pushed towards the sea
coast along the Kaveri basin elbowing the Cholas out of the way,
64

reached Kaverippattinam (formerly Puhar in the Sangham poetry

and Silappadhikaram) and successfully entrenched itself there.
Another branch marched along the Palar basin, reaching
Kanchipuram and areas to the north of it. We may say here a few
words about the thrust of the Kalabhras in the central areas
(Cholanad) and in the northern areas (Pallavanad or Tondainad.)

KALABHRAS IN CHOLANAD
The fortunes of the ruling dynasties have their ebb and tide.
We do know that the Cholas were great rulers in the Sangham
age but they suffered a kind of total eclipse in the post-Sangham
age till about the middle of the 9th century, when Vijayalaya, a
scion of the once glorious Chola dynasty, wrested a portion of the
ancestral territory from the petty Muttaraiyar chiefs who were
ruling there and re-established what has come to be known in the
history of South India as the Imperial Chola Dynasty. Chola
history during the intervening period is not ascertainable with
any degree of authenticity. The new race of Pallavas who were
ruling from Kanchipuram in Tondai Nadu were able to annex large
areas of the northern part of the Cholanad. The Pandyas had
annexed a good portion of the southern and western parts of the
Cholanad, so that the Cholas had confined themselves to small
pockets like Puhar and Palaiyarai in the east. So, when the
Kalabhras invaded the Cholanad, as they had done in the
Pandinad in the South and the Pallavanad in the North, the
Cholas had become weak and had already been reduced to an
65

insignificant place in the administration. They were unable to

resist.
On the secure installation of the Kalabhras at Kaverippatinam,
the Cholas had gone west, and settled down at Uraiyur, an
ancient and once glorious capital of the Cholas no doubt, but now
reduced to an insignificant position. History knows no great ruler
at this place at any time, the one exception being Koccengat
Chola, hailed as a great temple builder and as a canonized Saint
in Saivism. He lived probably in the middle of the 5th centuty
A.D. Contemporary with his rule, we have a Kalabhra ruling the
Chola country from Kaverippattinam. He is known to history and
literature as Accuta Vikkanta (Vikrama).
The Kalabhras were a race of marauders in all the three
territories, Pandiya, Chola and Pallava. Their might was spent out
in three centuries in all the areas. The Pandiyas and the Pallavas
had moved into the Chola territory and prevented the rise of the
Chola power for a further period of three centuries, at the end of
which, by the inexorable laws of nature, they had spent
themselves out, facilitating the rise of a glorious Chola power.

ACCUTA VIKKANTA
But all that is a later story. We find Accuta Vikkanta
entrenched strongly in Kaverippattinam by about the latter half
of the 5th century A.D. Buddha datta was a Buddhist writer of the
period who had written two works Abhidammavatara and Vinaya
viniccaya in the Pali language.
66

Buddha datta is said to be a contemporary of Buddha gosha

but Prof. Nilakanta Sastri says: "The tradition that makes him a
contempory of Buddha gosha is late and not warranted by any
statement in the extensive works of either of these divines.
Buddha datta might have been the earlier of the two to visit
Ceylon for studying Buddhism. It is quite certain that he lived in
the dark period of South Indian History after the light of the
Sangam literature fails and before a fresh dawn commences with
the Pandiya and Pallava Charters and his evidence is all the more
welcome"1. At the close of his book Abhidammavatara he gives a
glorious account of the greatness of the city of Kaverippattinam,
its rich trading community, its palaces and pleasure gardens,
which do remind us of the pictures of the city seen in
Pattinappalai and Silappadhikaram. He lived there in a great
monastery built by Kanha-dasa for some time and wrote this
book at the request of Sumati, one of his pupils no doubt.
Buddha datta again says that he wrote the Vinayaviniccaya for
the sake of Buddhasiha while he was residing in the lovely
monastry of Venhudasa in a city on the banks of the Kaveri, by
name Bhuta mangalam.2 described by him as the hub of Chola
rattha (probably Chola rashtra, the Chola nadj. He adds that this
work was begun and completed at the time when Accuta
Vikkanta of Kalabba kula3 was ruling over the earth. The
Kalabhra is mentioned as Kalabba kula as is natural to the Pali
and the Prakrit languages which soften the trill sounds.4 This is
the only evidence we have of the
67

1 The Colas by K.A. Nilakanta Sastri, 1975 - page 101.

2 Identification of this place is difficult. It is certainly not
Budalur, west of Tanjavur, as P.T. Srinivasa Aiyangar has said, nor
is it a place on the Koradacheri - Mannargudi road as stated by
Prof. Sastri. We know that there was a place called Bodhimangai
to the north of ICaraikkal ; Jnanasambandhar and his retinue
went there after worshipping at Tiru-Telicheri (two miles north of
modern Karaikkal ; as they were passing along that place on their
way to Tirukkadavur, about 8 miles from Tiru-Telicheri, the
Buddhists in the monastery there obstructed them and engaged
in a philosophical disputation with an assistant of
Jnanasambandhar. The very name and the mention of the
Buddhist monks in the monastery there help us to identify that
place as the Bhutamangalam of Buddha datta. It may be about
12 miles due south of Kaverippattinam, the place of Accuta
vikkanta.
3 Accuta was considered by some to belong to a Kalamba
dynasty ; but it has been seen to be wrong and there is no doubt
now about his hailing from the Kalabhra kula.
4. It is significant that Prof. Nilakanta Sastri in the remarks
quoted earlier, does not use the Pali text Kalabba kula as found in
the writing of Buddha datta but uses only the Sanskrit version of
it as Kalabhra kula.

68

.. Kalabhras in the Cholanad. This K alabhra clan is of the

Buddhist faith, while the one that held Madurai at the same
period was of the Jain faith. Buddha datta says that Accuta was
ruling over the earth; simultaneously there was alien rule in all
the areas - Pandinad, Choland and Tondainad, and so naturally
when Buddhadatta saw that the Kalabhra had subverted the
natural rule in the areas and established their own rule, he says
that Accuta is ruling over the entire land; this is no dobut a poetic
exaggeration.
Buddha datta is said to hail from Uragapura which is Uraiyur
where the Cholas, who were dislodged from Kaverip-pattinam,
were reigning over a small territory, Sanskritists then and now
have a flair for translating Tamil place names into the Sanskrit
language in a suitable manner. Uraiyur had been done as
Uragapuram (Uragapuri), giving a similarity of sound, though it
did not translate the sense.
We have a few verses noted by the commentator of
Tapparunkalam referring to this Accuta. One is a kalippa verse
praying to the Buddha to grant that Accutan with the long arms
like the clouds in giving, and with the fighting spear, might wield
his sceptre over the whole world (Peruntohai 150). Two other
verses (973 - 974) also in the kalippa metre are in the form of a
direct benediction on Accuta called here as Accuta nandi and the
Lord of Pahai, a sea port town and of the Nandi hill. In the true
poetic convention, he is identified with Visnnu in protection, and
69

all acts such as the feeding of the fire are attributed to him. The
first blesses him with a long reign; it does not mention the name
Accuta but mentions only Nandi. The second verse mentions both
the names and is couched in the same strain ending with the
statement that he is beyond the praise of poets.
Again there is a verse cited in the commentary (11th century)
of Gunasagarar on Tapparungalakkarikai (also written by the
author of rapparunkalam) which also praises this Accutan. This
verse says that the women of Korkai, the land protectod by
Accutan, cook the pearls of Korkai but the pearls are not
comparable in beauty to the lustre of their teeth. (It is to be
presumed that Accuta was ruling over at least a portion of
Pandinad also, as claimed by Buddha datta during the period.)
These verses are an indication that this line of Kalabhras at
Kaverippattinam, unlike the one at Madurai, was headed by
benevolent and just rulers who had earned the love and esteem
of the Tamil poets. It is possible that there were many such
verses and even books, but we do not have them today.
Incidentally, we may note that the reference of Buddha datta
to the glory of Kaverippattinam will help to resolve the problem
of the date of Manimekhalai. Although tradition would make the
two epics Silappadhikaram and Manimekhalai contemporary, a
careful study of the two books will give the reader the impression
that Manimekhalai must have been of a considerably later period.
Silappadhikaram gives a graphic picture of the large city of Puhar
70

(Kaverippa ttinam) and its culture and civilization, which are also
attested by Buddha datta1. But Manimekhalai mentions the great
calamity of the destruction of the city of Puhar by tidal waves as
a contemporary event.2 It is thus clear that the city was a
flourishing city in the days of Silappadhikaram (early part of the
third century A. D.) and also in the days of Buddhadatta (fifth
century) but is said to have been washed away by the sea by the
time Sattan wrote his Manimekhalai. It is thus evident that the
action of the sea was later than the fifth century, perhaps the
sixth which may be taken also as the date of Manimekalai. I am
not proceeding further in this matter as this is not the subject of
our enquiry here.

Buddhism
P 55 missing

. there was a Buddhist monastry at Nagappattinam which

was, according to the Vaishnava guruparampata of the 13th
century, looted by Tirumangai alvar to build the Ranganatha
temple at Sri Rangam. Yet much later, we find in the days of the
Chola supremacy, of Raja Raja the great, a Chudamani vihara for
Buddha was built at Nagappattinam by the Sailendra King of Sri
Vijaya, Sri Mara Vijayottungavarman.

KALABHRA AND KALAPPALA

The Velvikkudi plates mention the form Kalabhra, written there
in Sanskrit (grantha) characters (line 40) amidst the Tamil
portion. The term occurs in the form Kalappalar in the Dalavay
71

puram plates in lines 99 and 101. In the context of the mention

of the names we have to assume that Kalabhra and Kalappalar
are the same. Although the Velvikkudi plates mention Kalabhran
in the singular, we have to take it in the plural as the
Dalavaypuram plates mention the Kalappazhar kulam, and
Kalappalar in the plural. So it was a group or a clan of people
whom the plates refer to and not a single individual. The clan was
designated both as the Kalabhrar (Sanskrit) and as the
Kalappazhar (Tamil). The second term doems not have anything
to do with another term Kalappalar, which is a sort of family
name, in vogue in the Tamilnad in several areas in the ancient
past. It is quite possible that there were two independent terms
in the same form as Kappalar but had different connotations. It is
not correct to identify the two as one.
One of the knotty problems relating to the Kalabhras, in
addition to the name Kalabhra, to their origin and to the area
from which they migrated, is the word Kalappalar. The Velvikkudi
plates mention the form Kalabhra twice, in lines 40 and 114. The
first occurrence is `Kalabhran ennum kaliarasan kaikkondatanai
irakkiyapin' Here the reference is to the Kalabhran, kaliarasan, in
the singular. But in line 112 it is `Kalabhiraral irakkappattadu'.
Again the Dalavaypuram plates mention the `Kalappalar kulam
kalaindrum and' Kalappalaraik - kalaikatta' (line 131). The word
Kalabhra in the Velvikkudi plates is written in the grantha
characters while the word Kalappalar is written in the other
plates in the Tamil characters. In the several places where the
72

word Kalabhra occurs in the Pallava copper plates, it is always

Kalabhra in the grantha characters. So the correct form of the
name of the tribe which seized the Pandiya country and had also
been overthrown later by the Pandiyas, Pallavas etc., is certainly
Kalabhra. The point to be decided is whether the Kalabhras and
the Kalappalar are the same here.
The Dalavaypuram plates spell out the name as Kalappalar.
Four Pandiyas had ruled over Madurai after the Velvikkudi grant
was made and one hundred years had passed out of popular
memory. Yet the composer of the lines of the Dalavaypuram
plates desired to sing of the past glory of the Pandiya Kadumkon.
Naturally, he wanted to mention the removal of the Kalabhras.
Most likely he Tamilized the term Kalabhra into Kalappala which
has indeed a Tamilian ring. The fact that the Velvikkudi grant
goes out of the way to insert the name Kalabhra in the grantha
script amidst the Tamil lines definitely indicates that the invader
was known only as Kalabhra in the period and not by any other
name; the term Kalappalar is a Tamilization which is the result of
the passing of time by a hundred years. Kalappalar is the word
and the ending zhar is obviously a mistake of the carver in stone
for the lar ending. Thus we should take the word Kalappalar
simply as a substitute for Kalabhrar and nothing more.
But there comes an apparently insurmountable difficulty. The
Velalar of the country were a proud and noble race of native
farmers and agriculturists and were patrons of art and letters.
73

The story of Sadayappa Vallal of the 9th century and a host of

others may be recalled in this context. A few decades after the
suppression of the Kalabhras, we find Saint Tiru
Jnanasambandhar singing the glory of the Velalar and their trait
of giving and munificence in his song at Tiru Akkur: "The shrine of
Siva who has Uma as his consort is the Tantonrimadam of Akkur,
where live the industrious people called Velalar celebrated for
their gifts and munificence". [Sambandhar Devaram Book
2.42.3.]
So we see here that the Velalar had been a celebrated
community noted for their munificence, specially mentioned by
Sambandhar as early as about 650 A. D. Later literary history
tells us that one of the families of the Velalar was called
Kalappala. This family was one of high repute. There was again in
this family one Accuta Kalappala (early 12th century) whose son
was Meykandar the first apostle of the Saiva siddhanta system of
philosophy. Now the question which confronted all sincere
scholars, was how to reconcile this highly respected and spritual
community with this leader of the Kalabhra tribe if, as pointed
out, the two were one. It is beyond reason to expect that the
foreign Kalabhras after their political suppression had got
assimilated into the general social stream of Tamilian life and had
evolved into a highly respectable Saiva sect and even assumed
spiritual leadership. When we recall that the Kalabhras were a
race of bigoted Jainas of the digambara sect, the whole is not
only untenable, but highly absurd in the eyes of ardent Saivas.
74

Jnanasambandha carried on the severest tirade against the Jainas

and to say that after some five centuries the descendants of
those very Jains evolved the supreme spiritual leadership in the
very religion of Sambandhar their sworn enemy, is certainly a
hard pill to swallow. So scholars had vehemently protested that
the Kalabhra-Kalappalar had nothing to do with the Velalar and
their Kalappala families. The entire idea was anathema to them.

KALAPPALAR AND KALAPPALA-RATAR

We can cerrtainly agree with them. But the position is much
simple and not so complicated as it appears to be. There have
been a number of reputed chiefs in the 12th century in the name
of Kalappalar; some of them are styled Kalappala rayar. There
was one Kalappalarayar Nerkunram Kilar, hailing from the village
of Nerkunram in Tondainad near modern Madras, who was both a
chief and a patron, and also a poet. He was a devotee at the Siva
shrine at Tiru-Puhalur in Tanjavar district, where St. Appar
obtained his beatitude. Nerkunram kilar, also called
Nerkunravanar, has sung a poem on Siva at Puhalur of 100
Kattalaikkalitturai verses, in antadi called Tiruppuhalur antadi. It
is a poem couched in a difficult manner of writing, where in all
the four lines of each verse, more than half a dozen letters after
the first are identical. This form of composition is called Tiripu
antadi, and it is quite a difficult composition. The poem is in print
now and had been a text book for beginners in literature study up
to the beginning of the 20th century. The father of Meykandar the
author of Sivajnanabodham and founder of Saiva Siddhanta as a
75

distinctive and independent system of philosophy, was one

Accuta Kalappala, also called Accuta Kalappalaraya.
In the days of Raja Raja III (1216-1256) there was one Sekkilan
Palaravayanana Kalappalarayan at Tiru-Aratturai in South Arcot
district who was responsible for donating some lands to the
temple there for the celebration of the festival
ofJnanasambandhar receiving a gift of the pearl palanquin from
Siva enshrined there. Then in the days of Sadaya varman
Sundara Pandiya (1251-1271) there was a Kalappala raya in Tillai
who made some endowments to the Tillai Makali temple and also
helped the people at Pattukkottai. In the days of Sadayavarman
Virapandiyan, we meet a Kalappalarayar who built the entrance
hall of the Uttamachola Chaturvedi mangalam of Cholapuram
near Koilpatti; it was called Udayar Kalappala rayar mandapam.
In the days of Virarajendra deva of Kongunad, there was a
Kaduvetti Kannan Kalappala rayar.
Haridasa, in the days of Krishna devarayar (1497-1540) of
Vijayanagar wrotwe his Irusamayavilakkam,a large Tamil
dialectical work; he was also a Kalappala raya. All these were
Velalar. Kalappala is a family title among the Karkatta velalar of
Tamilnad today. Their reluctance to trace their genealogy from
the Jain Kalabhras of Pandinad notoriety is understandable.
However an important truth emerges when we study together
some other similar family (or gotra) titles of the Karkatta velalar.
The raya and araya were titles conferred by the Chola monarchs
76

of the past on the velalar who had helped them in their wars. We
see titles like Sembiya taraiya and Seliya taraiya. These persons
were originally given charge of certain small areas in Cholanad
and Pandinad in the Pandiya and Chola days of Imperial rule, and
were given these and similar titles. (Sembiya-Chola ; SeliyaPandiya.) There are numerous other titles such as Tennava raya,
Vanadhi raya, Konga raya, Kalinga raya, Vanava raya, Malaya
raya and several others. These titles appear to have been given
by the Cholas to the Velala captains and commanders who took
part in their battles and came out victorious over the Tennavas
(Pandiya), Banas, Kongus, Kalingas, Vanavas (Seras), Malavas
and so on. One Munaya daraya took part in the victorious
campaign of Kulottunga I against the Kalingas. His descendants
bearing the title Munaiyadaraya are still found in the Tanjavur
and Tirunelveli districts. In the same manner we have to say that
the Kalappala rayar mentioned were all descendants of the
warriors who took part in a suppression of the Kalappalar (or
Kalabhras) of Pandinad in 575 A. D. As the years rolled by, some
retained the full title Kalappalaraya while some omitted the suffix
and simply called themselves Kalappala. When the origins had
been forgotten and the full name had been curtailed for long, the
reluctance of the Velalar to call themselves Kalappala can be
easily undetstood. In the light of the explanation offered above,
all difficulties can easily be solved. Kalabhras and Kalappalar are
the same. Those Kalabhras or whatever was left of them as
Kalappalas got merged with the general stream of the Tamil
77

people in a totally indistinguishable manner. The Kalappalar of

the modern day are only Kalappala raya, the descendants of
those who fought the Kalabhra-Kalappalar in the 6th century and
suppressed them.

KUTRUVA NATANAR
Periya puranam relates the story of Kutruva Nayanar, in 9
verses. He was a petty chief at Kalandai and a great devotee of
Siva. Somehow he had a desire to be crowned as king with the
crown of the Chola dynasty which was kept in the custody of the
temple priests of Nataraja at Chidambaram. He requested them
to crown him. But they declined saying that the crown could be
placed only on the head of a Chola and not on any other.
Disappointed, he prayed to Lord Nataraja, who placed His Feet on
his head as a crown in a dream. Kutruva was much gratified at
the recognition of his devotion. With the Feet as his matchless
crown, he ruled over his territory.
Kutruva nayanar is of course mentioned by all the three - St.
Sundarar in his Tiruttondattohai as 'Kutran Kalandaikkon' ; St.
Nambiyandar nambi in his Tirutto ndar antadi as `Kalappalanahiya Kutruvane' ; and St. Sekkilar as 'Kalandai mudalvanar' and
`Kalandaik-Kutranar'.
Kalandai, the place of Kutruva nayanar, is now known as
Kalappal near Tirut-turaippundi in Tanjavur district. It has an
ancient temple built by Aditta Chola (871-907) and sanctified by
Karuvur Devar as Kalandai - Adittesvaram in a song of his
78

included in the Ninth Book (Tiruvisaippa) of the Saiva canon.

There are a few relics in the place now associated with Kutruvar,
such as Kutruvan tidal, Kutruvan kulam etc. [It is not right to
place this Kalandai in the Tondainad, because there are no early
associations].
Some persons would say that this Kalandai is a place in
Tondainad, known as Kalattur. Considering all things, it has to be
identified with the Kalandai of Cholanad (Kalappal) and not with
Kalattur of Tondainad.
There are several features to be noted now in respect of
Kutruva nayanar. Sundarar calls him simply Kalandaik-kon, the
Lord of Kalandai. Sekkilar also calls him only Kalandai
mudalvanar (chief) and Kalandai-k-kutranar. But Nambi calls him
Kalappalan - ahiya Kutruvan; Kutruvan who is a Kalappalan. We
should remember that Nambi elaborated the single line mention
of Sundarar into a full verse, which in the next century Sekkilar
elaborated into a purana of nine verses Generally we can be sure
that a subsequent writer did not deviate from or twist the earlier
writer's words. In the case of Nambi, the earlier writer is St.
Sundarar whom Nambi would not like to twist. So the term he
uses, Kalappalan ahiya, has to be interpreted only in the terms of
Sundarar's term Kalandaikkon. Hence Kalappalan is to be taken
not as a separate term meaning something different but only as
an elaboration of the earlier term Kalandai. Kalappalan is the the
chief of Kalandai; Nambi has here abbreviated Kalandai as
79

Kalappu and adding the suffix alan he has coined a new term
Kalappalan, which only means in the light of the above
explanation, chief of Kalandai.
Some have advanced the theory that Kutruvanar was a
Kalappala which they would have as a Kalabhra on the lines of
the mention in the other copper plate grants. In such a case he
should have come from a stock which was originally non-Saiva
and so the Tillai Andanar might be said to be certainly justified in
declining to crown him. The Kalabhras who seized Madurai were
bigoted Jabs; but the same tribe which seized Kaverippattinam
was not a Jain clan, but a Buddhist clan. All of them originally
hailed from a central Jain area and we learn that at the centre the
tribe might have taken its religion lightly, as Jain or Buddhist, as
the occasion might have suited them.
But in the light of the explanation offered above, Kutruvan
Kalappala is not a Kalappalar of the Velvikkudi grant. The two
Kalappalar may by the same term ; but Kalappalan. in relation to
Kutruvan can be interpreted only in the light of Kalandaik-kon of
Sundarar and K alandai mudalvanar of Sekkilar. Hence we
definitely say that he has nothing to do with the Kalabhra.
Besides, we may remember that the period is about the FifthSixth centuries A. D., after the days of Koc-chengat Chola. No
Kalabhra descendant is likely to have embraced Saivism and
aspired for being crowned as a king by the Tillaivazh-andanar.
This is a presumption which history does not warrant. Change
80

comes about only by 575 A. D. on Kadunkon's suppression of the

Kalabhras.
M. Raghave Aiyanagar has been quoted as noting that the
word Kalappalar was derivable from Kalappar, just as andanar
andanalar, aruvar - aruvalar and vel - velalar. But the analogy
does not fit ; because in these three cases, the original simpler
term is a common word and has a meaning ; and anar - brahmin ;
aruvar -a person of the Tamil country or of the aruva nadu; vel - a
member of the farming community. The suffix in all these cases
denotes the possessor of these respective qualities, such as
antanmai (brahminhood), Tamil citizenship and farming. But
there is no such word as Kalappar and therefore also no such
quality to which the suffix aalar can be added. Hence this
derivation cannot be made.
So, we can only say that Kutruvan was a Kalandaik-kon but not
the Kalappalar mentioned in the Pandiyan copper plates.

A LATER ACCUTA KALAPPALA

Some verses found in the Tamil Navdlar Charitai, an anthology
of about 260 verses made by an unknown compiler of the 17th
century, are equated with the Accuta Kalabhra (Vikkanta), a few
verses in whose praise are cited in the rapparunkala virutti. Three
venbas are supposed to have been sung by the Tamil monarchs,
the Sera, Chola and Pandiya praising his prowess. The story is
that he had vanquished them and put them in prison and when
they were all released in the course of a celebration in the palace
81

of Accuta on the occasion of the birth of a son and heir to him,

they sang these verses. There are also other verses glorifying
this Accuta, praising his valour and the march of his army.
The language of all the verses is quite modern and it is clear
they cannot belong to the early period of the Kalabhras' sway
over Pandinad. The Charitai is merely a compilation of the
interesting versee which the anonymous compiler collected and
noted down with the context as he came to know of it. The right
contexts were not always known, and stories grew up attaching a
wrong or false association to the subject. History does not give us
any Accuta Kalappala of a later period, who was a ruler or had
great might. The only one known to us is Accuta Kalappala, father
of Meykandar in the 12th century and by no stretch of
imagination can these verses be applied to him.

KALABHRAS IN TONDAINAD
The division of Kalabhras who entered the Tondainad marched
along the Palar basin. Their domination over the Tondainad was
ended by Siva Skanda varman temporarily by about the middle of
the 3rd century A.D., probably the same period as that in which
another group of the clan marching south had driven away the
Pandiyas and occupied Madurai. The Kalabhra occupation of the
Tondainad could have been partly responsible for some of the
Pallava rulers to have been of the Jaina persuasion. The Kalabhra
occupation of Kanchi and Tondainad does not appear to have
been as decisive and complete as it was in Pandinad and in
82

Cholanad. There had been frequent skirmishes between the

Pallavas and the Kalabhras in and around Kanchipuram. The city
of Kanchi had always been changing hands and finally
Simhavishnu wrested it from the Kalabhras in the latter half of
the 6th century. Although in later history, others had also been
holding the city for short periods, the Kalabhras could no more
hold any prominent position in the Tondainad, which may be
called the Pallavanad hereafter, as the Pallavas had finally
established themselves there.
The Kasakkudi plates of Nandivarman II (732 A.D.) state that
Avanisimha (Simha Vishnu) defeated Malva, Kalabhra, Chola,
Pandiya, Singala and Kerala rulers. Then Nandivarma Pallava's
plates state that Nandivarman secured a victory over the rulers
of more than ten states of whom the Kalabhras are again
mentioned. Again his Kotrangudi plates (771 A.D.) state that the
rulers of seven states were waiting at his palace doors to learn
his pleasure; of these the Kalabhras are again mentioned. All
these would give us the impression that although the Kalabhras
as a political force had been spent out in this part of the country,
they had been offering resistance to the Pallava expansion by
their alliance with the Cholas in the South, whom in an earlier
period they had themselves driven away from power.

83